8 research outputs found

    Lenalidomide Maintenance with or without Prednisone in Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients: A Pooled Analysis

    Get PDF
    We conducted a pooled analysis of two phase III trials, RV-MM-EMN-441 and EMN01, to compare maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone vs. lenalidomide in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible and -ineligible myeloma patients. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival, progression-free survival 2 and overall survival with both regimens. A secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of duration of maintenance on overall survival and on outcome after relapse. A total of 625 patients (lenalidomide-prednisone arm, n = 315; lenalidomide arm, n = 310) were analyzed. The median follow-up was 58 months. Median progression-free survival (25 vs. 19 months; p = 0.08), progression-free survival 2 (56 vs. 49 months; p = 0.9) and overall survival (73 months vs. NR; p = 0.08) were not significantly different between the two arms. Toxicity profiles of lenalidomide-prednisone and lenalidomide were similar, with the exception of neutropenia that was higher in the lenalidomide arm (grade ≥ 3: 9% vs. 19%, p < 0.001), without an increase in the rate of infections. Overall survival (median NR vs. 49 months, p < 0.001), progression-free survival from relapse (median 35 vs. 24 months, p = 0.004) and overall survival from relapse (median not reached vs. 41 months, p = 0.002) were significantly longer in patients continuing maintenance for ≥2 years. We showed that the addition of prednisone at 25 or 50 mg every other day (eod) to lenalidomide maintenance did not induce any significant advantage

    A phase 2 study of three low-dose intensity subcutaneous bortezomib regimens in elderly frail patients with untreated multiple myeloma

    Get PDF
    This phase 2 trial evaluated three low-dose intensity subcutaneous bortezomib-based treatments in patients. 75 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Patients received subcutaneous bortezomib plus oral prednisone (VP, N=51) or VP plus cyclophosphamide (VCP, N=51) or VP plus melphalan (VMP, N=50), followed by bortezomib maintenance, and half of the patients were frail. Response rate was 64% with VP, 67% with VCP and 86% with VMP, and very good partial response rate or better was 26%, 28.5% and 49%, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 14.0, 15.2 and 17.1 months, and 2-year OS was 60%, 70% and 76% in VP, VCP, VMP, respectively. At least one drug-related grade. 3 non-hematologic adverse event (AE) occurred in 22% of VP, 37% of VCP and 33% of VMP patients; the discontinuation rate for AEs was 12%, 14% and 20%, and the 6-month rate of toxicityrelated deaths was 4%, 4% and 8%, respectively. The most common grade. 3 AEs included infections (8-20%), and constitutional (10-14%) and cardiovascular events (4-12%); peripheral neuropathy was limited (4-6%). Bortezomib maintenance was effective and feasible. VP, VCP and VMP regimens demonstrated no substantial difference. Yet, toxicity was higher with VMP, suggesting that a two-drug combination followed by maintenance should be preferred in frail patients

    Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide compared with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma: updated follow-up and improved survival.

    No full text
    PURPOSE: Bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) has improved overall survival in multiple myeloma. This randomized trial compared VMP plus thalidomide (VMPT) induction followed by bortezomib-thalidomide maintenance (VMPT-VT) with VMP in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 511 patients who were not eligible for transplantation to receive VMPT-VT (nine 5-week cycles of VMPT followed by 2 years of VT maintenance) or VMP (nine 5-week cycles without maintenance). RESULTS: In the initial analysis with a median follow-up of 23 months, VMPT-VT improved complete response rate from 24% to 38% and 3-year progression-free-survival (PFS) from 41% to 56% compared with VMP. In this analysis, median follow-up was 54 months. The median PFS was significantly longer with VMPT-VT (35.3 months) than with VMP (24.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.58; P < .001). The time to next therapy was 46.6 months in the VMPT-VT group and 27.8 months in the VMP group (HR, 0.52; P < .001). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was greater with VMPT-VT (61%) than with VMP (51%; HR, 0.70; P = .01). Survival from relapse was identical in both groups (HR, 0.92; P = .63). In the VMPT-VT group, the most frequent grade 3 to 4 adverse events included neutropenia (38%), thrombocytopenia (22%), peripheral neuropathy (11%), and cardiologic events (11%). All of these, except for thrombocytopenia, were significantly more frequent in the VMPT-VT patients. CONCLUSION: Bortezomib and thalidomide significantly improved OS in multiple myeloma patients not eligible for transplantation
    corecore