Search

Here, the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) updates its clinical practice recommendations for the management of multiple myeloma-related renal impairment on the basis of data published until Dec 31, 2022. All patients with multiple myeloma and renal impairment should have serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and free light chains (FLCs) measurements together with 24-h urine total protein, electrophoresis, and immunofixation. If non-selective proteinuria (mainly albuminuria) or involved serum FLCs value less than 500 mg/L is detected, then a renal biopsy is needed. The IMWG criteria for the definition of renal response should be used. Supportive care and high-dose dexamethasone are required for all patients with myeloma-induced renal impairment. Mechanical approaches do not increase overall survival. Bortezomib-based regimens are the cornerstone of the management of patients with multiple myeloma and renal impairment at diagnosis. New quadruplet and triplet combinations, including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, improve renal and survival outcomes in both newly diagnosed patients and those with relapsed or refractory disease. Conjugated antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor T-cells, and T-cell engagers are well tolerated and effective in patients with moderate renal impairment., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MAD has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), GSK, Janssen, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Pharmacyclics, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals. FB holds consulting roles for Janssen, AstraZeneca, Attralus, and Prothena; and is part of the speakers’ bureau for GSK, Janssen, and Sanofi. NL has received institutional research support for clinical trials from Omeros and holds stocks in AbbVie. JM holds consulting roles for Amgen, BMS, Janssen, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Sanofi, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals. SJH holds consulting roles for and has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS-Celgene, GSK, HaemaLogiX, Janssen, Novartis, Roche-Genetec, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, EUSA Pharma, and Terumo; and research funding from Amgen, BMS-Celgene, GSK, HaemaLogiX, Janssen, and Roche-Genetec. EK has received honoraria and research funding from Amgen, Janssen, GSK, and Pfizer. LG has received honoraria from BMS-Celgene, Janssen, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, and GSK. AG has received honoraria from Janssen, Amgen, and Sanofi. NWCJvdD has received research support from Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Cellectis, and BMS, all paid to their institution; and serves in advisory boards for Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, BMS, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Novartis, and Adaptive Biotechnologies. KCW has received honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, Adaptive Biotechnologies, AstraZeneca, BMS-Celgene, BeiGene, GSK, Janssen, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Novartis, Oncopeptides, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Stemline Therapeutics, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals; and research support (paid to their institution) from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS-Celgene, GSK, Janssen, and Sanofi. AZB has received research grants from Janssen, BMS, GSK, and Celgene. MB serves in advisory boards for Janssen, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Menarini, and Pfizer; and is part of the speakers’ bureau for Janssen, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi. JH has received honoraria for serving in advisory boards from Amgen, Angitia, Axxess Network, GSK, Janssen, and Sanofi; honoraria for talks from Amgen, BeiGene, Beijing Medical Award Foundation, Curio Science, Janssen, and Target Oncology; and is part of the Data Safety Monitoring Committee for Janssen. MM has received honoraria from Adaptive Biotechnologies, Amgen, Astellas Pharma, BMS, GSK, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Stemline Therapeutics, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals; and research funding from Janssen and Sanofi. PJH is a member of advisory boards (without honorarium) for Antengene, Gilead Science, Janssen, and Pfizer. M-VM has received honoraria derived from lectures and participation in advisory boards from Janssen, BMS-Celgene, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, GSK, AbbVie, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Sanofi, and Oncopeptides. PR holds consulting roles for Oncopeptides, BMS-Celgene, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Sanofi, GSK, AstraZeneca, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, and Janssen; and has received research grants from Oncopeptides, BMS-Celgene, Karyopharm Therapeutics, and Takeda. JB has received honoraria for lectures from Janssen, Amgen, BMS-Celgene, and Sanofi. PM has received honoraria from and serves in advisory boards for Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, AbbVie, and GSK. JS-M serves in advisory boards and provides consulting services, on behalf of their institution, for AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, GSK, HaemaLogiX, Janssen-Cilag, Karyopharm Therapeutics, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Sanofi, and SecuraBio. SVR is a member of the board of directors for the International Myeloma Foundation and has received royalties for creating content from UpToDate. HL has received honoraria from Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, BMS, Sanofi, AbbVie, Pfizer, and Seagen; and research support from Amgen and Sanofi. ET has received honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, EUSA Pharma, GSK, Integris Pharma, Janssen, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals; research support (paid to their institution) from Amgen, GSK, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals; and travel grants from Amgen, EUSA Pharma, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This Policy Review presents the International Myeloma Working Group's clinical practice recommendations for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Based on the results of phase 2 and phase 3 trials, these recommendations are proposed for the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory disease who have received one previous line of therapy, and for patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who have received two or more previous lines of therapy. These recommendations integrate the issue of drug access in both low-income and middle-income countries and in high-income countries to help guide real-world practice and thus improve patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Cell death escape is one of the most prominent features of tumor cells and closely linked to the dysregulation of members of the Bcl-2 family of proteins. Among those, the anti-apoptotic family member myeloid cell leukemia-1 (MCL-1) acts as a master regulator of apoptosis in various human malignancies. Irrespective of its unfavorable structure profile, independent research efforts recently led to the generation of highly potent MCL-1 inhibitors that are currently evaluated in clinical trials. This offers new perspectives to target a so far undruggable cancer cell dependency. However, a detailed understanding about the tumor and tissue type specific implications of MCL-1 are a prerequisite for the optimal (i.e., precision medicine guided) use of this novel drug class. In this review, we summarize the major functions of MCL-1 with a special focus on cancer, provide insights into its different roles in solid vs. hematological tumors and give an update about the (pre)clinical development program of state-of-the-art MCL-1 targeting compounds. We aim to raise the awareness about the heterogeneous role of MCL-1 as drug target between, but also within tumor entities and to highlight the importance of rationale treatment decisions on a case by case basis.

Future progress in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) requires both the characterisation of key drivers of the disease and novel, innovative approaches to tackle these vulnerabilities. The present study focussed on the pre-clinical evaluation of a novel drug class, BMI-1 modulators, in MM. We demonstrate potent activity of PTC-028 and PTC596 in a comprehensive set of in vitro and in vivo models, including models of drug resistance and stromal support. Treatment of MM cells with PTC-028 and PTC596 downregulated BMI-1 protein levels, which was found to correlate with drug activity. Surprisingly, BMI-1 was dispensable for the activity of BMI-1 modulators and MM cell growth. Our data rather point to mitotic arrest accompanied by myeloid cell leukaemia-1 (MCL-1) loss as key anti-MM mechanisms and reveal impaired MYC and AKT signalling activity due to BMI-1 modulator treatment. Moreover, we observed a complete eradication of MM after PTC596 treatment in the 5TGM.1 in vivo model and define epigenetic compounds and B cell leukaemia/lymphoma 2 homology domain 3 (BH3) mimetics as promising combination partners. These results bring into question the postulated role of BMI-1 as an essential MM gene and confirm BMI-1 modulators as potent anti-mitotic agents with encouraging pre-clinical activity that supports their rapid translation into clinical trials., (© 2020 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: This study aimed to report patterns of biosimilar filgrastim prophylaxis and outcomes of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN)/febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with hematological malignancies or solid tumors., Patients & Methods: MONITOR-GCSF is a real-world study of 1447 cancer patients receiving CIN/FN prophylaxis with biosimilar filgrastim (solid tumors: 77.2%; hematological malignancies: 22.8%)., Results: Differences in prophylaxis intensity and day of initiation relative to guideline recommendations were observed. In hematology patients, higher rates of CIN and FN occurred at cycle level, and rate of FN was higher at patient level (9.1 vs 5.0% in solid tumor patients)., Conclusion: Adequate GCSF support in hematology and solid tumor patients is important to prevent CIN/FN and related hospitalizations and chemotherapy disturbances.

During the last few years, several new drugs have been introduced for treatment of patients with multiple myeloma, which have significantly improved the treatment outcome. All of these novel substances differ at least in part in their mode of action from similar drugs of the same drug class, or are representatives of new drug classes, and as such present with very specific side effect profiles. In this review, we summarize these adverse events, provide information on their prevention, and give practical guidance for monitoring of patients and for management of adverse events.

On August 28, 2015, a marketing authorization valid through the European Union was issued for panobinostat, in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least two prior regimens including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD).Panobinostat is an orally available histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor that inhibits the enzymatic activity of HDAC proteins at nanomolar concentrations. HDAC proteins catalyze the removal of acetyl groups from the lysine residues of histones and some nonhistone proteins. Inhibition of HDAC activity results in increased acetylation of histone proteins, an epigenetic alteration that results in a relaxing of chromatin, leading to transcriptional activation. The recommended starting dose of panobinostat is 20 mg, taken orally in a cyclical manner for up to 48 weeks.The use of panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone was studied in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III study (PANORAMA I) in 768 patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received one to three prior lines of therapies. In the subgroup of patients who have received at least two prior regimens including bortezomib and an IMiD, there was a difference of 7.8 months in the progression-free survival in favor of the experimental arm (12.5 months for panobinostat + bortezomib + dexamethasone vs. 4.7 months for placebo + bortezomib + dexamethasone; hazard ratio = 0.47, 95% confidence interal 0.31-0.72; log-rank p value = .0003). The incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events suspected to be related to study drug was 76.9% vs. 51.2%, for the panobinostat and the placebo group, respectively. The most common side effects (grade 3-4) associated with panobinostat included diarrhea (18.9%), fatigue (14.7%), nausea (4.5%), vomiting (5.5%), thrombocytopenia (43.6%), anemia (7.9%), neutropenia (16.5%) and lymphopenia (8.1%).This article summarizes the scientific review of the application leading to regulatory approval in the European Union. The full scientific assessment report and product information, including the Summary of Product Characteristics, are available on the European Medicines Agency website (http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/includes/medicines/medicines_landing_page.jsp&mid=)., Implications for Practice: Farydak was approved in the European Union in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone, for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least two prior regimens including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD). The addition of panobinostat to bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement of progression-free survival compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone, and an additional therapeutic option with a new mechanism of action was considered valuable. Although the toxicity associated with panobinostat combination was significant, at the time of the marketing authorization of panobinostat, it was considered that it was acceptable and that it should be left to the clinician and the patient to decide whether the panobinostat combination is the preferred treatment option or not., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© AlphaMed Press 2017.)

This FIRST trial final analysis examined survival outcomes in patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) treated with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous), Rd for 72 weeks (18 cycles; Rd18), or melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT; 72 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS; primary comparison: Rd continuous vs MPT). Overall survival (OS) was a key secondary endpoint (final analysis prespecified ≥60 months' follow-up). Patients were randomized to Rd continuous (n = 535), Rd18 (n = 541), or MPT (n = 547). At a median follow-up of 67 months, PFS was significantly longer with Rd continuous vs MPT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.79; P < .00001) and was similarly extended vs Rd18. Median OS was 10 months longer with Rd continuous vs MPT (59.1 vs 49.1 months; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.67-0.92; P = .0023), and similar with Rd18 (62.3 months). In patients achieving complete or very good partial responses, Rd continuous had an ≈30-month longer median time to next treatment vs Rd18 (69.5 vs 39.9 months). Over half of all patients who received second-line treatment were given a bortezomib-based therapy. Second-line outcomes were improved in patients receiving bortezomib after Rd continuous and Rd18 vs after MPT. No new safety concerns, including risk for secondary malignancies, were observed. Treatment with Rd continuous significantly improved survival outcomes vs MPT, supporting Rd continuous as a standard of care for patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00689936 and EudraCT as 2007-004823-39., (© 2018 by The American Society of Hematology.)

A fungal strain of Aspergillus niger was recovered from sediments collected in the Northeast coast of Brazil (Pecém's offshore port terminal). Cultivation in different growth media yielded a new ester furan derivative, 1, along with malformin A1, malformin C, cyclo (trans-4-hydroxy-L-Pro-L-Leu), cyclo (trans-4-hydroxy-L-Pro-L-Phe), cyclo (L-Pro-L-Leu), cyclo (L-Pro-L-Phe), pseurotin D, pseurotin A, chlovalicin, cyclo (L-Pro-L-Tyr) and cyclo (L-Pro-L-Val). Compound 1 was cytotoxic against HCT-116 cell line, showing IC 50  = 2.9 μg/mL (CI 95% from 1.8 to 4.7 μg/mL).

The treatment of multiple myeloma is considered a continuously evolving paradigm as a result of the growing availability of new and highly effective drugs, including first- and second-generation proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and monoclonal antibodies. Clinical trials advocate long-term rather than short-term treatment schedules with combinations of these new anti-myeloma drug classes. Although the overall toxicity profile of the recommended regimens can be considered favorable, their increasing complexity and prolonged use warrant a heightened vigilance for early and late side effects, a priori because real-life patients can be more frail or present with 1 or more comorbidities. The treatment decision process, at diagnosis and at relapse, therefore requires myeloma physicians to carefully balance efficacy and toxicity profiles for each individual patient. Early and/or unnecessary tapering or treatment discontinuation for drug-related adverse events may not only reduce patients' quality of life, but also negatively impact their outcome. Accurate knowledge in recognizing and managing the potential side effects of present-day treatment regimens is therefore a cornerstone in myeloma care. Using 5 case vignettes, we discuss how to prevent and manage the most common nonhematological adverse events of anti-myeloma treatment regimens containing proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies., (© 2017 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: Myelotoxic chemotherapy is associated with chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia (CIN/FN). The MONITOR-GCSF study evaluated biosimilar filgrastim (Zarzio®) prophylaxis patterns, associated outcomes, and determinants. We performed stratified analyses comparing elderly and non-elderly patients., Methods: Comparative (elderly/non-elderly) analysis of demographics and clinical status, prophylaxis, associated CIN/FN outcomes (CIN grade 4 [CIN4], FN, CIN/FN-related hospitalizations and chemodisturbances, composite), and, per hierarchical modeling, determinants thereof evaluated at the patient- and cycle-level., Results: There were no significant differences between both cohorts in prophylaxis initiation/duration and associated outcomes, but proportionately more elderly patients were correctly-prophylacted and fewer over-prophylacted. Common determinants of poor CIN/FN outcomes included concomitant antibiotic prophylaxis, impaired performance status, and any grade CIN in a previous cycle, whereas common determinants of good outcomes included over-prophylaxis and prophylaxis initiation within 24-72h. In the elderly, female gender, liver/renal/cardiovascular disease, secondary prophylaxis, and under-prophylaxis were associated with poorer outcomes. In the non-elderly, CIN4 at baseline or in a prior cycle was associated with poorer CIN/FN outcomes, and higher biosimilar filgrastim dose and, perhaps counter-intuitively, under-prophylaxis with better outcomes., Conclusion: Adequate GCSF support is essential for all patients, but especially for elderly patients with serious chronic disease, certainly, if concomitant antibiotic prophylaxis is indicated and if a CIN4 episode occurred in a prior cycle. The potential impact of impaired performance status, especially ECOG≥2 at chemotherapy start or a worsening to such during chemotherapy; under-prophylaxis, including inadequate secondary prophylaxis, should be considered in elderly patients. Timely GCSF initiation and over-prophylaxis is associated with lower rates of adverse CIN/FN events in elderly and non-elderly patients, and should be further evaluated in prospective randomized trials., (Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are a recent addition to multiple myeloma (MM) therapies and a number of mAbs directed at myeloma cell surface molecules are in development. Daratumumab is a CD38 mAb that has demonstrated substantial activity and good tolerability in four phase I, phase I/II and phase II studies as monotherapy, as well as in combination with current standard treatments in MM. The positive results obtained in the relapsed/refractory setting in patients with advanced-stage disease and in a small number of patients with newly diagnosed disease provide the rationale for the investigation of the agent in a number of ongoing phase III trials. mAbs are generally better tolerated than conventional chemotherapy; however, their use requires other special considerations. Such factors include those common to all mAbs, namely infusion-related reactions, but also factors that are observed with mAbs used in myeloma, such as interference with response assessment, or factors that are related to CD38 mAbs such as daratumumab, for instance blood typing interference. Our review provides an overview of the results from the daratumumab clinical trials conducted to date, as well as practical management considerations for the use of daratumumab based on our experience with the agent.

Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is an asymptomatic clonal plasma cell disorder and bridges monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance to multiple myeloma (MM), based on higher levels of circulating monoclonal immunoglobulin and bone marrow plasmocytosis without end-organ damage. Until a Spanish study reported fewer MM-related events and better overall survival among patients with high-risk SMM treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, prior studies had failed to show improved survival with earlier intervention, although a reduction in skeletal-related events (without any impact on disease progression) has been described with bisphosphonate use. Risk factors have now been defined, and a subset of ultra-high-risk patients have been reclassified by the International Myeloma Working Group as MM, and thus will require optimal MM treatment, based on biomarkers that identify patients with a >80% risk of progression. The number of these redefined patients is small (∼10%), but important to unravel, because their risk of progression to overt MM is substantial (≥80% within 2 years). Patients with a high-risk cytogenetic profile are not yet considered for early treatment, because groups are heterogeneous and risk factors other than cytogenetics are deemed to weight higher. Because patients with ultra-high-risk SMM are now considered as MM and may be treated as such, concerns exist that earlier therapy may increase the risk of selecting resistant clones and induce side effects and costs. Therefore, an even more accurate identification of patients who would benefit from interventions needs to be performed, and clinical judgment and careful discussion of pros and cons of treatment initiation need to be undertaken. For the majority of SMM patients, the standard of care remains observation until development of symptomatic MM occurs, encouraging participation in ongoing and upcoming SMM/early MM clinical trials, as well as consideration of bisphosphonate use in patients with early bone loss., (©AlphaMed Press.)

We conducted a pooled analysis of 869 individual newly diagnosed elderly patient data from 3 prospective trials. At diagnosis, a geriatric assessment had been performed. An additive scoring system (range 0-5), based on age, comorbidities, and cognitive and physical conditions, was developed to identify 3 groups: fit (score = 0, 39%), intermediate fitness (score = 1, 31%), and frail (score ≥2, 30%). The 3-year overall survival was 84% in fit, 76% in intermediate-fitness (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; P = .042), and 57% in frail (HR, 3.57; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 nonhematologic adverse events at 12 months was 22.2% in fit, 26.4% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.23; P = .217), and 34.0% in frail (HR, 1.74; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of treatment discontinuation at 12 months was 16.5% in fit, 20.8% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.41; P = .052), and 31.2% in frail (HR, 2.21; P < .001) patients. Our frailty score predicts mortality and the risk of toxicity in elderly myeloma patients. The International Myeloma Working group proposes this score for the measurement of frailty in designing future clinical trials. These trials are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01093136 (EMN01), #NCT01190787 (26866138MMY2069), and #NCT01346787 (IST-CAR-506).

The cytotoxic activities of extracts (50 μg/ml) from 48 fungal strains, recovered from sediments of Pecém's offshore port terminal (Northeast coast of Brazil), against HCT-116 colon cancer cell lines were investigated. The most promising extract was obtained from strain BRF082, identified as Dichotomomyces cejpii by phylogenetic analyses of partial RPB2 gene sequence. Thus, it was selected for bioassay-guided isolation of the cytotoxic compounds. Large-scale fermentation of BRF082 in potato dextrose broth, followed by chromatographic purification of the bioactive fractions from the liquid medium, yielded gliotoxin (4) and its derivatives acetylgliotoxin G (3), bis(dethio)bis(methylsulfanyl)gliotoxin (1), acetylgliotoxin (5), 6-acetylbis(dethio)bis(methylsulfanyl)gliotoxin (2), besides the quinazolinone alkaloid fiscalin B. All isolated compounds were tested for their cytotoxicities against the tumor cell lines HCT-116, revealing 4 and 3 as the most cytotoxic ones (IC50 0.41 and 1.06 μg/ml, resp.)., (Copyright © 2015 Verlag Helvetica Chimica Acta AG, Zürich.)

A fungal strain of Aspergillus sp. (BRF 030) was isolated from the sediments collected in the northeast coast of Brazil, and the cytotoxic activity of its secondary metabolites was investigated against HCT-116 tumour cell line. The cytotoxicity-guided fractionation of the extracts from this fungus cultured in potato-dextrose-sea water for 14 days at room temperature yielded the hetero-spirocyclic γ-lactams pseurotin A (1), pseurotin D (2) and pseurotin FD-838 (7), the alkaloids fumitremorgin C (5), 12,13-dihydroxy fumitremorgin C (6), methylsulochrin (4) and bis(dethio)bis(methylthio)gliotoxin (3). Among them, fumitremorgin C (5) and 12,13-dihydroxy fumitremorgin C (6) were the most active. The cytotoxic activities of the extracts from Aspergillus sp. grown from 7 to 28 days were investigated, and they were associated with the kinetic production of the compounds. The most active extracts (14 and 21 days) were those with the highest relative concentrations of the compounds fumitremorgin C (5) and 12,13-dihydroxy fumitremorgin C (6).

This randomized trial evaluated ferric carboxymaltose without erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) for correction of anemia in cancer patients with functional iron deficiency. Patients on treatment for indolent lymphoid malignancies, who had anemia [hemoglobin (Hb) 8.5-10.5 g/dL] and functional iron deficiency [transferrin saturation (TSAT) ≤ 20%, ferritin >30 ng/mL (women) or >40 ng/mL (men)], were randomized to ferric carboxymaltose (1,000 mg iron) or control. Primary end point was the mean change in Hb from baseline to weeks 4, 6 and 8 without transfusions or ESA. Difficulties with patient recruitment led to premature termination of the study. Seventeen patients (8 ferric carboxymaltose and 9 control) were included in the analysis. In the ferric carboxymaltose arm, mean Hb increase was significantly higher versus control at week 8 (p = 0.021). All ferric carboxymaltose-treated patients achieved an Hb increase >1 g/dL (control 6/9; p = 0.087), and mean TSAT was >20% from week 2 onwards. No treatment-related adverse events were reported. In conclusion, ferric carboxymaltose without ESA effectively increased Hb and iron status in this small patient population.

Purpose: Patients with cancer frequently experience chemotherapy-induced anaemia (CIA) and iron deficiency. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), iron supplementation and blood transfusions are available therapies. This study evaluated routine practice in CIA management., Methods: Medical oncologists and/or haematologists from nine European countries (n=375) were surveyed on their last five cancer patients treated for CIA (n=1,730). Information was collected on tests performed at diagnosis of anaemia, levels of haemoglobin (Hb), serum ferritin and transferrin saturation (TSAT), as well as applied anaemia therapies., Results: Diagnostic tests and therapies for CIA varied across Europe. Anaemia and iron status were mainly assessed by Hb (94%) and ferritin (48%) measurements. TSAT was only tested in 14%. At anaemia diagnosis, 74% of patients had Hb ≤ 10 g/dL, including 15% with severe anaemia (Hb <8 g/dL). Low-iron levels (ferritin ≤ 100 ng/mL) were detected in 42% of evaluated patients. ESA was used in 63%of patients, blood transfusions in 52 % and iron supplementation in 31% (74% oral, 26% intravenous iron). Only 30% of ESA-treated patients received a combination of ESA and iron supplementation. Blood transfusions formed part of a regular anaemia treatment regimen in 76% of transfused patients. Management practices were similar in 2009 and 2011., Conclusion: Management of anaemia and iron status in patients treated for CIA varies substantially across Europe. Iron status is only assessed in half of the patients. In contrast to clinical evidence, iron treatment is under utilised and mainly based on oral iron supplementation. Implementation of guidelines needs to be increased to minimize the use of blood transfusions.

Treatment in medical oncology is gradually shifting from the use of nonspecific chemotherapeutic agents toward an era of novel targeted therapy in which drugs and their combinations target specific aspects of the biology of tumor cells. Multiple myeloma (MM) has become one of the best examples in this regard, reflected in the identification of new pathogenic mechanisms, together with the development of novel drugs that are being explored from the preclinical setting to the early phases of clinical development. We review the biological rationale for the use of the most important new agents for treating MM and summarize their clinical activity in an increasingly busy field. First, we discuss data from already approved and active agents (including second- and third-generation proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory agents and alkylators). Next, we focus on agents with novel mechanisms of action, such as monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs), cell cycle-specific drugs, deacetylase inhibitors, agents acting on the unfolded protein response, signaling transduction pathway inhibitors and kinase inhibitors. Among this plethora of new agents or mechanisms, some are specially promising: anti-CD38 MoAb, such as daratumumab, are the first antibodies with clinical activity as single agents in MM. Moreover, the kinesin spindle protein inhibitor Arry-520 is effective in monotherapy as well as in combination with dexamethasone in heavily pretreated patients. Immunotherapy against MM is also being explored, and probably the most attractive example of this approach is the combination of the anti-CS1 MoAb elotuzumab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, which has produced exciting results in the relapsed/refractory setting.

Background: Carfilzomib is a next-generation proteasome inhibitor with single-agent activity in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM). In PX-171-003-A1, a single-arm phase 2 study of carfilzomib monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients, the overall response rate was 23.7%, 37% of patients achieved ≥ minimal response and median overall survival (OS) was 15.6 months. Based on this study, carfilzomib was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of R/R MM. Herein we describe the trial design and rationale for a phase 3 randomized study, FOCUS (CarFilzOmib for AdvanCed Refractory MUltiple Myeloma European Study), being conducted to compare OS after treatment with single-agent carfilzomib to best supportive care (BSC) regimen in R/R MM., Methods: Patients must have received ≥3 prior regimens, must be responsive to at least 1 line of therapy, and be refractory to their most recent therapy. Eligible patients are randomized 1:1 to receive either carfilzomib (28-day cycles at 20 mg/m(2) IV on Days 1-2 of Cycle 1, escalating to 27 mg/m(2) IV on Days 8, 9, 15, and 16 and continuing at 27 mg/m(2) through Cycle 9 and Days 1, 2, 15, and 16 ≥ Cycle 10) or an active BSC regimen (corticosteroid treatment of prednisolone 30 mg, dexamethasone 6 mg, or equivalent every other day with optional cyclophosphamide 50 mg PO once daily). Patients will continue treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or treatment discontinuation and will then enter long-term follow-up for survival. The primary endpoint is OS and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall response rate, and safety. Disease assessments will be determined according to the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response Criteria with minimal response per European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Group criteria., Conclusions: This phase 3 trial will provide more rigorous data for carfilzomib, as this is the first carfilzomib study with OS as the primary endpoint and will not be confounded by crossover and will provide more robust secondary response and safety results that will add to the data set from prior phase 2 studies. FOCUS will facilitate regulatory approvals around the world and expand treatment options for patients with R/R MM., Trial Registration: EudraCT No. 2009-016840-38; NCT01302392.

In anemic patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) raise hemoglobin levels and reduce transfusion requirements, but ESA-related safety concerns exist. To evaluate ESA benefits and risks in lung cancer, we conducted meta-analyses of data from controlled ESA trials conducted in lung cancer patients. Study-level analyses included controlled ESA trials reporting lung cancer mortality, identified from the 2006 Cochrane ESA report and from a systematic search for studies published through December 2010. Patient-level analyses included data from lung cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in Amgen studies evaluating darbepoetin alfa (DA) vs placebo. Study-level and patient-level analyses examined deaths, progression, and transfusion incidence. Patient-level analyses also examined adverse events (AEs) and fatigue. In a study-level meta-analysis of nine ESA studies of 2342 patients receiving chemotherapy, the ESA odds ratio (OR) was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.09) for mortality; the overall random-effects risk difference (95% CI) for mortality was -0.02 (-0.06, 0.02). The ESA OR (95% CI) for disease progression in five chemotherapy studies reporting progression was 0.84 (0.65-1.09). The ESA odds ratio (95% CI) was 0.34 (0.28-0.41) for transfusion incidence. In a patient-level meta-analysis of four studies evaluating 1009 patients through follow-up, the median survival time was 41 weeks with DA and 38 weeks with placebo. During the combined study and follow-up periods, 80% of placebo-group patients and 74% of DA patients died (mortality hazard ratio [HR] 0.90 [95% CI, 0.78-1.03] for DA); results were similar for small cell lung cancer and non-small cell lung cancer. Overall, 87% of placebo patients and 84% of DA patients progressed or died. Fewer DA patients had transfusions (week 5 through end-of-study, DA 19%, placebo 43%). AEs included thrombotic/embolic events (DA 10.5%, placebo 7.2%), cerebrovascular disorders (DA 3.7%, placebo 4.2%), pulmonary edema (DA 0.4%, placebo 1.0%) and pulmonary embolism (DA 1.8%, placebo 0.6%). These meta-analyses suggest that ESAs reduce transfusions without increasing mortality or disease progression in lung cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Renal impairment is a major complication of multiple myeloma. Patients presenting with severe renal impairment represent a greater therapeutic challenge and generally have poorer outcome. However, once patients with renal impairment achieve remission, their outcomes are comparable with those of patients without renal impairment. Therapies that offer substantial activity in this setting are needed. Bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide have substantially improved the survival of patients with multiple myeloma. Here we review the pharmacokinetics, activity, and safety of these agents in patients with renal impairment. Bortezomib can be administered at the full approved dose and schedule in renally impaired patients; similarly, no dose reductions are required with thalidomide. The pharmacokinetics of lenalidomide is affected by its renal route of excretion, and dose adjustments are recommended for moderate/severe impairment. Substantial evidence has emerged showing that these novel agents improve outcomes of patients with renal impairment, including impairment reversal. Bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide (at the recommended doses) are active options for patients with mild to moderate impairment, although limited data are available for thalidomide. Information on lenalidomide-based combinations is still emerging, but the available data indicate considerable activity. Substantial evidence indicates that bortezomib-high-dose dexamethasone with or without a third drug (e.g., cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or doxorubicin) is an appropriate option for patients with any degree of renal impairment., (©2012 AACR.)

Overexpression of the transcription factor interferon regulatory factor-4 (IRF4), which is common in multiple myeloma (MM), is associated with poor prognosis. Patients with higher IRF4 expression have significantly poorer overall survival than those with low IRF4 expression. Lenalidomide is an IMiD immunomodulatory compound that has both tumouricidal and immunomodulatory activity in MM. This study showed that lenalidomide downregulated IRF4 levels in MM cell lines and bone marrow samples within 8 h of drug exposure. This was associated with a decrease in MYC levels, as well as an initial G1 cell cycle arrest, decreased cell proliferation, and cell death by day 5 of treatment. In eight MM cell lines, high IRF4 levels correlated with increased lenalidomide sensitivity. The clinical significance of this observation was investigated in 154 patients with MM. Among MM patients with high levels of IRF4 expression, treatment with lenalidomide led to a significantly longer overall survival than other therapies in a retrospective analysis. These data confirm the central role of IRF4 in MM pathogenesis; indicate that this is an important mechanism by which lenalidomide exerts its antitumour effects; and may provide a mechanistic biomarker to predict response to lenalidomide., (© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

The introduction of the Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors, used either as a single-agent or combined with classic anti-myeloma therapies, has improved the outcome for patients with relapsed myeloma. However, there is currently no generally accepted standard treatment for relapsed/refractory myeloma patients, partly because of the absence of trials comparing the efficacy of the novel agents in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Choice of a new treatment regimen depends on both patient and disease-specific characteristics. A lenalidomide-based regimen is the first choice in patients with neuropathy, while bortezomib has the highest efficacy in patients with renal insufficiency and is not associated with increased risk of thromboembolism. A second autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) can be applied in patients with a progression-free period of ≥ 18-24 months after the first auto-SCT. In high-risk relapse such as occurring early after auto-SCT consolidation with allogeneic SCT can be considered. In this review we provide an overview of the various salvage regimens and give recommendations for treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma in different clinical settings., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

An expert panel convened to reach a consensus regarding the optimal use of lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone (Len/Dex) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). On the basis of the available evidence, the panel agreed that Len/Dex is a valid and effective treatment option for most patients with RRMM. As with other therapies, using Len/Dex at first relapse is more effective regarding response rate and durability than using it after multiple salvage therapies. Len/Dex may be beneficial regardless of patient age, disease stage and renal function, although the starting dose of lenalidomide should be adjusted for renal impairment and cytopenias. Long-term treatment until there is evidence of disease progression may be recommended at the best-tolerated doses of both lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Recommendations regarding the prevention and management of adverse events, particularly venous thromboembolism and myelosuppression, were provided on the basis of the available evidence and practical experience of panel members. Ongoing trials will provide more insight into the effects of continuous lenalidomide-based therapy in myeloma.

Bortezomib-dexamethasone (Btz/Dex) is an active regimen in patients with multiple myeloma and has been used in few patients with amyloidosis. Here, we report a retrospective evaluation of the efficacy and toxicity of Btz/Dex in 26 patients with AL amyloidosis (AL). Eighteen patients (69%) received Btz/Dex as first-line treatment. Organs most frequently involved were kidneys (100%) and heart (35%); five patients (19%) had less than two organs involved. The overall response rate was 54% (14 of 26 patients), with eight patients (31%) achieving a hematologic complete remission (CR). All patients who reached a CR received Btz/Dex as first-line therapy. Median time to response was 7.5 weeks. Improvement in organ function was noticed in three patients (12%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was 5.0 and 18.7 months, respectively; in CR patients, however, median PFS and OS have not yet been reached. Toxicities were manageable, with hematological side effects being most common. No grade 3/4 neuropathy was observed. Our results confirm the activity of bortezomib/dexamethasone in patients with AL amyloidosis and suggest that patients achieving a CR have a marked benefit for survival.

Introduction of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib and the immunomodulatory drugs thalidomide and lenalidomide has substantially improved outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma. As a result, these drugs have become cornerstones of current antimyeloma treatment regimens. However, after several years of clinical experience it has become apparent that peripheral neuropathy is the most common and potentially disabling non-haematological side-effect associated with thalidomide and bortezomib. Maximising treatment benefit while preserving quality of life therefore requires a careful balance between achieving optimum activity and minimising toxicity, including neuropathy, to further enhance efficacy. In this review, we discuss all aspects of drug-induced peripheral neuropathy in myeloma, with a particular focus on thalidomide and bortezomib., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Imexon [AOP99.0001 (4-imino-1,3-diazobicyclo[3. 1. 0]-hexan-2-one)] belongs to a novel class of promising anticancer agents that induce tumor apoptosis through oxidative stress. Clinical experience since the late 1960s has provided initial evidence for a clinical antitumor activity. Our open-label, multicenter phase I clinical trial was designed to further investigate the adverse event (AEs) profile and pharmacokinetics of AOP99.0001 in pretreated myeloma patients and collect initial data on the potential clinical efficacy in this indication. Thirty-six patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma, who had been pretreated with at least two lines of therapy earlier, were included. Imexon was applied intravenously on 5 consecutive days for 2 weeks (d1-5 and d8-12) for a 3-week cycle. The plasma half-life of AOP99.0001 and its active metabolite AOP99.0002 was found to be approximately 1.2 and 2.6 h, respectively. The mean duration of treatment with Imexon was 6.8 weeks in a dose range between 50 and 1000 mg/m without reaching dose-limiting toxicity. Drug-related AEs occurring with a frequency of greater than 10% were fatigue, nausea, constipation, headache, asthenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia and creatinine increase. A total of nine severe adverse events occurred in three patients. No mortality was encountered when patients were on treatment with Imexon. Preliminary antimyeloma efficacy of AOP99.0001 was observed with 1 minimal response, 12 (36%) stable disease responses, and all other evaluable patients had progressive disease. Remarkably, the patient with minimal response also experienced a complete clinical resolution of myeloma-associated polyneuropathy. Overall, Imexon was safe and well tolerated in the dose range investigated. Imexon showed minor clinical activity as a single agent in heavily pretreated myeloma patients. On account of its unique mechanism of action, favorable toxicity profile, initial clinical evidence for antimyeloma activity, and its known synergistic activity in combination with approved agents for myeloma treatment, AOP99.0001 is recommended for future clinical studies in combination regimens in multiple myeloma.

Erythropoiesis stimulating proteins are approved for chemotherapy-induced anemia. Treatment with ESPs results in an increase in hemoglobin in 60 - 70 % of patients and in a significant reduction in transfusion need. A marked increase in hemoglobin levels usually is associated with an improvement in quality of life. Relevant side effects include an increase in thromboembolic complications and, in case of use in unapproved indications, a minimally increased mortality, which is not seen when ESPs are used in the approved indications. Treatment with ESPs should be initiated at hemoglobin levels < 100 g/l and a target level of 120 g/l should not be exceeded.

The treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) has undergone significant developments in recent years. The availability of the novel agents thalidomide, bortezomib, and lenalidomide has expanded treatment options and has improved the outcome of patients with MM. Following the introduction of these agents in the relapsed/refractory setting, they are also undergoing investigation in the initial treatment of MM. A number of phase III trials have demonstrated the efficacy of novel agent combinations in the transplant and nontransplant settings, and based on these results standard induction regimens are being challenged and replaced. In the transplant setting, a number of newer induction regimens are now available that have been shown to be superior to the vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone regimen. Similarly, in the front-line treatment of patients not eligible for transplantation, regimens incorporating novel agents have been found to be superior to the traditional melphalan plus prednisone regimen. Importantly, some of the novel agents appear to be active in patients with high-risk disease, such as adverse cytogenetic features, and certain comorbidities, such as renal impairment. This review presents an overview of the most recent data with these novel agents and summarizes European treatment practices incorporating the novel agents.

In 2005, the first guidelines were published on the management of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). An expert panel reviewed the currently available literature as the basis for a set of revised and updated consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with MM who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation. Here we present recommendations on the diagnosis, treatment of newly diagnosed non-transplant-eligible patients and the management of complications occurring during induction therapy among these patients. These guidelines will aid the physician in daily clinical practice and will ensure optimal care for patients with MM.

Purpose: This randomized study assessed whether the best overall response rate (ORR) of cetuximab combined with oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil (FOLFOX-4) was superior to that of FOLFOX-4 alone as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. The influence of KRAS mutation status was investigated., Patients and Methods: Patients received cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) initial dose followed by 250 mg/m(2)/wk thereafter) plus FOLFOX-4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1, plus leucovorin 200 mg/m(2) and fluorouracil as a 400 mg/m(2) bolus followed by a 600 mg/m(2) infusion during 22 hours on days 1 and 2; n = 169) or FOLFOX-4 alone (n = 168). Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. KRAS mutation status was assessed in the subset of patients with assessable tumor samples (n = 233)., Results: The confirmed ORR for cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 was higher than with FOLFOX-4 alone (46% v 36%). A statistically significant increase in the odds for a response with the addition of cetuximab to FOLFOX-4 could not be established (odds ratio = 1.52; P = .064). In patients with KRAS wild-type tumors, the addition of cetuximab to FOLFOX-4 was associated with a clinically significant increased chance of response (ORR = 61% v 37%; odds ratio = 2.54; P = .011) and a lower risk of disease progression (hazard ratio = 0.57; P = .0163) compared with FOLFOX-4 alone. Cetuximab plus FOLFOX-4 was generally well tolerated., Conclusion: KRAS mutational status was shown to be a highly predictive selection criterion in relation to the treatment decision regarding the addition of cetuximab to FOLFOX-4 for previously untreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Purpose: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ixabepilone as neoadjuvant therapy for invasive breast cancer not amenable to breast conservation surgery. Gene expression studies were undertaken using genes that were identified as potentially associated with sensitivity/resistance to ixabepilone in prior preclinical investigations., Patients and Methods: Patients with invasive breast cancer >or= 3 cm were eligible. Ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) was administered as a 3-hour intravenous infusion on day 1 of a 21-day cycle for four or fewer cycles., Results: One hundred sixty-one patients were treated. The overall complete pathologic response (pCR) rate was 18% in breast and 29% in estrogen receptor (ER) -negative patients. Gene expression data were available for 134 patients. ER gene expression (ER1) was inversely related to pCR in breast and had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 37% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 92%. A 10-gene penalized logistic regression (PLR) model developed from 200 genes predictive of ixabepilone sensitivity in preclinical experiments included ER and tau and had higher PPV (45%) and comparable NPV (89%) to ER1. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events (AEs) were reported for 32% of patients. Except for neutropenia and leukopenia, all grade 3 to 4 AEs occurred in

Background: The purpose of this report was to review issues associated with the introduction of alternative versions of biosimilars used in the oncology setting., Design: Data were obtained by searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, references from relevant English-language articles, and guidelines from the European Medicines Agency., Results: When biosimilars are approved in EU, they will be considered 'comparable' to the reference product, but this does not ensure therapeutic equivalence. Inherent differences between biosimilars may produce dissimilarities in clinical efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity. Switching biosimilars should be considered a change in clinical management. Regulatory guidelines have been established for some biosimilar categories but, because of the limited clinical experience with biosimilars at approval, pharmacovigilance programs will be important to establish clinical databases. Guidelines also provide a mechanism for the extrapolation of clinical indications (approved indications for which the biosimilar has not been studied). This may be of concern where differences in biological activity can result in adverse outcomes or when safety is paramount (e.g. stem cell mobilization in healthy donors). These issues should be addressed in biosimilar labeling., Conclusions: Biosimilars should provide cost savings and greater accessibility to biopharmaceuticals. A thorough knowledge surrounding biosimilars will ensure the appropriate use of biopharmaceuticals.

Goal: The benefit of supportive care with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) for patients with cancer-related anaemia is well known. However, the European Cancer Anaemia Survey (ECAS, data from 2001) showed that about 60% of cancer patients with anaemia do not receive any treatment. Since ECAS, evidence-based guidelines have provided recommendations for ESA use, but it is not known to what extent current treatment patterns follow these guidelines. To address this issue, the Anaemia Cancer Treatment (A.C.T.) study was initiated. The background to the development of the A.C.T. study and study methodology are described., Materials and Methods: The A.C.T. study is a global, retrospective, pharmacoepidemiologic study of at least 2,560 medical records of anaemic patients with cancer who were previously treated with an ESA from a minimum of 186 centres. Records from patients aged greater than or equal to 18 years with a diagnosis of solid tumour or myeloma or lymphoma and who were started on ESAs 3-12 months before inclusion and followed for 8-10 weeks will be eligible. Factors associated with ESA non-responsiveness will also be evaluated., Main Results: Completion of the European phase of the study is anticipated in late 2007 with the rest of the world closing in late 2007 or early 2008. Publication of findings is anticipated in 2008., Conclusions: By examining the extent to which anaemia management in clinical practice is congruent with best practice guidelines, the A.C.T. study will provide a further foundation for the development of evidence-based supportive cancer care.

Background: In this study, the development and validation of a cycle-based prediction model for severe anemia [i.e., a hemoglobin (Hb) of or=8 to <10 was identified as the optimal cut off to maximize the sensitivity (83.1%) and specificity (67.8%) of the prediction tool. Patients with a score of >or=8 would be considered at high risk for developing anemia after a particular cycle of chemotherapy., Discussion: We developed and validated an anemia prediction tool for advanced stage NSCLC patients receiving palliative chemotherapy. To make the model available for easy use and access, we have incorporated it on to our risk prediction website: http://www.PredictPatientEvents.com . It is hoped that this risk model will enhance patient care by optimizing the frequency of Hb testing and/or the use of preventative therapies.

Studies of bortezomib in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) suggested that bortezomib may be active even in the presence of adverse prognostic factors. We therefore evaluated 62 patients with relapsed/refractory MM who were treated with single-agent bortezomib, and addressed the question whether or not the negative prognostic impact of unfavorable cytogenetic abnormalities may be overcome by bortezomib. By interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), a deletion of chromosome 13q14 [del(13q14)] was present in 33 patients (53%). Overall response rates to bortezomib were similar in patients with and without del(13q14) (45 versus 55%; P=0.66), and rates of complete remission (CR) near CR were also not different between the two patient populations (18 versus 14%). Three patients had a t(4;14)(p16;q32) in addition to del(13q14), and all of them had a >50% paraprotein reduction. Median duration of response was 12.3 months in patients with del(13q14) compared with 9.3 months in patients with normal 13q-status (P=0.25), and survival was also not different between the two patient populations. Patients not benefiting from single-agent bortezomib were characterized by the combined presence of a del(13q14) and low serum albumin (median survival 4.6 months). Our results provide evidence for remarkable activity of bortezomib in MM with del(13q14). Patients who do not respond to bortezomib and consecutively have short time to treatment failure and overall survival can be identified by low serum albumin in addition to del(13q14) and should be considered for bortezomib combinations.

In the present phase II study, we tested the efficacy of a single course of rituximab (375 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 and 22) as treatment for relapsed myeloma. The rationale for this study was the identification of a population of clonotypic CD20+ B cells that are believed to be precursors of malignant plasma cells. In addition, CD20 was expressed on 10% and 50% of bone marrow plasma cells in two of the ten patients enrolled. Following rituximab treatment, none of the patients achieved an objective response. Two patients had stable disease at month 6, the predefined end of the study, while, at that time, two patients were classified as having progressive disease. One patient opted to withdraw from the study at month 3, at which time he had stable disease. The other five patients had to be withdrawn early from the post-treatment observation because of need of salvage therapy for progressive disease. WHO grade

Despite intensive therapy, multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease, and novel treatment approaches are therefore needed to improve outcome. Bortezomib is the first proteasome inhibitor to be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products for the treatment of refractory or relapsed MM following the failure of at least two prior lines of therapy. Recently, it also received approval from the FDA for use as a second-line agent. An expert panel of hematologists met at the Ninth Congress of the European Hematology Association to review clinical data and experience in the treatment of MM with bortezomib, including bortezomib-based combination therapy. The conclusions of this expert panel, together with updated clinical data from the American Society of Hematology 46th Annual Meeting, provide a practical update on the use of bortezomib in MM. Bortezomib has demonstrated significant antitumor activity as a single agent in refractory and/or relapsed MM, with a significantly longer survival than with dexamethasone (1-year overall survival rate of 80% vs. 66%) and a 78% longer median time to progression. In combination therapy, patient responses suggest the possibility of chemosensitization and synergy. Furthermore, bortezomib does not appear to have an adverse effect on subsequent stem cell therapy. Bortezomib is well tolerated; most side effects are only mild to moderate and are manageable. Information is given on the practical management of the most common adverse events, including peripheral neuropathy and thrombocytopenia, and the use of bortezomib in renal and hepatic impairment.

Cure for multiple myeloma is rare; the success of treatment is measured by response, and length of remissions and survival. Initial treatment for patients young and fit enough is high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation. Various chemotherapy regimens are employed as initial therapy in patients who cannot withstand the autologous stem cell transplantation regimen, and for treatment of refractory or relapsed disease. Commonly used agents either alone or in combination have included dexamethasone, vincristine, doxorubicin, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, cisplatin and, more recently, thalidomide. Within the past few years, the first-in-class proteasome inhibitor bortezomib has been introduced for the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma with data demonstrating efficacy and safety. Throughout Europe, a faculty of experts conducted a series of debates with over 450 clinicians to discuss the efficacy of bortezomib vis-à-vis other available therapies. Of primary concern was the place of bortezomib in maximizing efficacy throughout the course of the disease and treatment by increasing response rates and improving duration of response, while maintaining an acceptable level of toxicity. The experts concluded that bortezomib, with its unique mechanism of action and demonstrated clinical efficacy and safety, should be considered as standard, early treatment in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, especially after first relapse., (Copyright 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

The proteasome is responsible for the degradation of intracellular proteins, including several involved in cell cycle control and the regulation of apoptosis. Preclinical studies have shown that the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib decreases proliferation, induces apoptosis, enhances the activity of chemotherapy and radiation, and reverses chemoresistance in a variety of hematologic and solid malignancy models in vitro and in vivo. Proteasome inhibition with bortezomib has specifically promoted apoptosis of tumor cells through the stabilization of p53, p21, p27, Bax, and IkappaBalpha, resulting in nuclear factor kappaB inhibition. Bortezomib was the first proteasome inhibitor to enter clinical trials. In two Phase II trials, SUMMIT and CREST, it was found that treatment with bortezomib, alone or in combination with dexamethasone, produced durable responses with meaningful survival benefits in patients with recurrent and/or refractory multiple myeloma. In the APEX Phase III trial, bortezomib produced significant survival benefits and improved response rates over high-dose dexamethasone at first recurrence and beyond in patients with multiple myeloma. Clinical trials evaluating the safety and activity of bortezomib alone or in combination regimens with dexamethasone, doxorubicin, melphalan, prednisone, and/or thalidomide in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma have shown encouraging results. Preliminary studies suggest that bortezomib may serve as induction therapy before stem cell transplantation. Proteasome inhibition with bortezomib also has shown activity with manageable toxicity in mantle cell and other lymphomas, leukemias, and solid malignancies, including nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. Further studies with bortezomib as monotherapy and in combination regimens in the treatment of solid and hematologic malignancies are warranted., ((c) 2005 American Cancer Society.)

Background: Arsenic trioxide delivers high rates of complete clinical remission in patients with relapsed/refractory acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL), and is associated with high rates of molecular remission as indicated by PCR negativity for the PML-RARalpha gene., Objective: Mitochondria are considered to be the primary intracellular target of arsenic trioxide, and preclinical and mechanistic studies suggest that this agent may have broad applicability in haematological and other malignancies. Investigations of this agent are ongoing in a range of haematological malignancies, and studies in newly diagnosed APL, acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), multiple myeloma (MM) and chronic myelogenous leukaemia (CML) are reviewed here using published articles and presentations at international congresses to June 2004. Medline was used to source published preclinical and clinical data, and abstract databases and publications from relevant major international haematology/oncology congresses were searched to source updates of preclinical and clinical trial data., Findings: Accumulating data indicate that arsenic trioxide may be a useful addition to the therapeutic regimens that have been so successful in treating newly diagnosed APL, and investigations are ongoing to incorporate this agent into the first-line APL treatment paradigm. Preliminary data from clinical studies indicate that arsenic trioxide has clinical activity as a single agent in MDS and MM, and combination therapies are being investigated. In MM, the combination regimens under study incorporate ascorbic acid, which can enhance the efficacy of arsenic trioxide by reducing intracellular glutathione concentrations. In CML, arsenic trioxide is being investigated in combination with imatinib mesylate in patients who have failed initial imatinib treatment. In AML, although results with single-agent arsenic trioxide were not encouraging, treatment using arsenic trioxide in combination with ascorbic acid is a proposed strategy in elderly patients not able to withstand intensive chemotherapy., Conclusion: This versatile agent has a predictable and manageable safety profile and avoids many of the severe toxicities associated with conventional chemotherapies. Ongoing clinical studies will help to define the role of arsenic trioxide in the treatment of haematological malignancies.

Even though interferon (IFN) has been used in myeloma treatment for more than two decades, its efficacy is still controversial. Meta-analysis of randomized trials is based either on individual patient data or on published data. We performed meta-analyses on published and reported data using, in addition to the standard method, three independent methods of evaluating Kaplan-Meier curves. Thirty randomized trials on IFN induction or maintenance treatment were meta-analyzed. Combined IFN-chemotherapy induction treatment resulted in significant increases of repsonse rates (6.6%), as well as median relapse-free (4.8 months) and overall survival (3.1 months). IFN maintenance treatment prolonged median relapse-free survival by 4.4 months, median overall survival by 7.9 months. Drug costs of IFN per 1-year survival gain were US$ 42,236.19 for induction therapy and US$ 18,114.95 for maintenance treatment. To conclude, our results a are in accordance with those obtained from individual patient data by the Myeloma Trialists' Collaborative Group. Because of the consistent, though limited, improved trial outcomes, IFN treatment should be suggested to all myeloma patients who might benefit from it.

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of recombinant interferon alpha-2a (rh-IFN) on estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR) receptor expression in patients with advanced breast cancer and the evaluation of the effect of rh-IFN pretreatment on response to endocrine therapy with tamoxifen (TAM). Between June 1990 and November 1992, 20 patients with disseminated breast cancer and with metastatic skin nodules suitable for biopsy were entered into this study. Eighteen assessable patients underwent biopsy before and 2 weeks after treatment with rh-INF. rh-INF 3 x 10(6) IU were administered subcutaneously per day. Patients with ER expression at second biopsy were subsequently treated with 20 mg TAM daily. One patient had rapid disease progression and died before rebiopsy could be performed, and an additional patient refused second biopsy. All other patients were considered assessable. Thirteen patients showed ER expression before rh-IFN treatment, and 5 PR presented with expression. Rh-IFN increased ER expression in three patients and PR in four patients. No change was observed in 8 patients for ER and in 12 patients for PR. ER expression decreased in seven patients and PR expression decreased in two patients, respectively. Two patients showed a partial remission after subsequent treatment with TAM. Adverse reactions caused by rh-IFN were mainly flu-like symptoms. In this trial we found no systematic impact of rh-IFN on hormone receptor expression and, subsequently, on the response rate in patients with advanced breast cancer.

The study compares letrozole (Femara and aminoglutethimide (AG), a standard therapy for postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with anti-estrogens. 555 women were randomly assigned letrozole 2.5 mg once daily (n = 185), letrozole 0.5 mg once daily (n = 192) or aminoglutethimide 250 mg twice daily with corticosteroid support (n = 178) in an open-label, multicenter trial. The primary end-point was objective response rate (ORR), with time events as secondary. ORR was analysed nine months after enrollment of the last patient, while survival was analysed 15 months after the last patients was enrolled. We report the results of these analyses plus an extended period of observation (covering a total duration of approximately 45 months) to determine the duration of response and clinical benefit. Overall objective response rates (complete + partial) of 19.5%, 16.7% and 12.4% were seen for letrozole 2.5 mg, 0.5 mg and AG respectively. Median duration of response and stable disease was longest for letrozole 2.5 mg (21 months) compared with letrozole 0.5 mg (18 months) and AG (14 months). Letrozole 2.5 mg was superior to AG in time to progression, time to treatment failure and overall survival. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in fewer patients on letrozole (33%) than on AG (46%). Letrozole 2.5 mg offers longer disease control than aminoglutethimide and letrozole 0.5 mg in the treatment of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer, previously treated with anti-estrogens.