Search

Familial forms of monoclonal gammopathy, defined as multiple myeloma (MM) or Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance (MGUS), are relatively infrequent and most series reported in the literature describe a limited number of families. MM rarely occurs in a familial context. MGUS is observed much more commonly, which can in some cases evolve toward full-blown MM. Although recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities have been described in tumor cells of sporadic cases of MM, the pathogenesis of familial MM remains largely unexplained. In order to identify genetic factors predisposing to familial monoclonal gammopathy, the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome identified 318 families with at least two confirmed cases of monoclonal gammopathy. There were 169 families with parent/child pairs and 164 families with cases in at least two siblings, compatible with an autosomal transmission. These familial cases were compared with sporadic cases who were matched for age at diagnosis, sex and immunoglobulin isotype, with 10 sporadic cases for each familial case. The gender distribution, age and immunoglobulin subtypes of familial cases were unremarkable in comparison to sporadic cases. With a median follow-up of 7.4 years after diagnosis, the percentage of MGUS cases having evolved to MM was 3%. The median overall survival of the 148 familial MM cases was longer than that of matched sporadic cases, with projected values of 7.6 and 16.1 years in patients older and younger than 65 years, respectively. These data suggest that familial cases of monoclonal gammopathy are similar to sporadic cases in terms of clinical presentation and carry a better prognosis., (© 2023 The Authors. American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

High-dose melphalan (HDM) and transplantation are recommended for eligible patients with multiple myeloma. No other conditioning regimen has proven to be more effective and/or safer. We previously reported in a phase 2 study that bortezomib can safely and effectively be combined with HDM (Bor-HDM), with a 32% complete response (CR) rate after transplantation. These data supported a randomized phase 3 trial. Randomization was stratified according to risk and response to induction: 300 patients were enrolled, and 154 were allocated to the experimental arm (ie, arm A) with bortezomib (1 mg/m2 intravenously [IV]) on days -6, -3, +1, and +4 and melphalan (200 mg/m2 IV) on day -2. The control arm (ie, arm B) consisted of HDM alone (200 mg/m2 IV). There were no differences in stringent CR + CR rates at day 60 posttransplant (primary end point): 22.1% in arm A vs 20.5% in arm B (P = .844). There were also no differences in undetectable minimum residual disease rates: 41.3% vs 39.4% (P = .864). Median progression-free survival was 34.0 months for arm A vs 29.6 months for arm B (adjusted HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.61-1.13; P = .244). The estimated 3-year overall survival was 89.5% in both arms (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.62-2.64; P = .374). Sixty-nine serious adverse events occurred in 18.7% of Bor-HDM-treated patients (vs 13.1% in HDM-treated patients). The proportion of grade 3/4 AEs was similar within the 2 groups (72.0% vs 73.1%), mainly (as expected) blood and gastrointestinal disorders; 4% of patients reported grade 3/4 or painful peripheral neuropathy in arm A (vs 1.5% in arm B). In this randomized phase 3 study, a conditioning regimen with Bor-HDM did not improve efficacy end points or outcomes compared with HDM alone. The original trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02197221., (© 2022 by The American Society of Hematology.)

With the introduction of immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies, major improvements have been achieved in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), with a significant impact on the outcome of this disease. Different treatment combinations are now in use and other therapies are being developed. Based on an extensive review of the recent literature, we propose practical recommendations on myeloma management, to be used by hematologists as a reference for daily practice.

Multiple myeloma (MM) is rare in young patients, especially before age 40 years at diagnosis, representing <2% of all patients with MM. Little is known about the disease characteristics and prognosis of these patients. In this study, we examined 214 patients diagnosed with MM at age ≤40 years over 15 years, in the era of modern treatments. Among them, 189 patients had symptomatic MM. Disease characteristics were similar to older patients: 35% had anemia, 17% had renal impairment, and 13% had hypercalcemia. The staging was ISS-1 in 52.4%, ISS-2 in 27.5%, and ISS-3 in 20.1%. Overall, 18% of patients had high-risk cytogenetics [del 17p and/or t(4;14)]. Ninety percent of patients received intensive chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant, and 25% of patients had allogeneic stem cell transplant predominantly at time of relapse. The median follow-up was 76 months, the estimated median overall survival was 14.5 years, and the median progression free-survival was 41 months. In multivariate analysis, bone lesions (hazard ratio [HR], 3.95; P = .01), high ISS score (HR, 2.14; P = .03), and high-risk cytogenetics (HR, 4.54; P < .0001) were significant risk factors for poor outcomes. Among predefined time-dependent covariables, onset of progression (HR, 13.2; P < .0001) significantly shortened overall survival. At 5 years, relative survival compared with same age- and sex-matched individuals was 83.5%, and estimated standardized mortality ratio was 69.9 (95% confidence interval, 52.7-91.1), confirming that MM dramatically shortens the survival of young patients despite an extended survival after diagnosis., (© 2021 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: In the phase 3 ALCYONE study, daratumumab plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (VMP) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. We present a subgroup analysis of ALCYONE by patient frailty status., Patients and Methods: Frailty assessment was performed retrospectively using age, Charlson comorbidity index, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Patients were classified as fit (0), intermediate (1), or frail (≥2); a nonfrail category combined fit and intermediate patients., Results: Among randomized patients (D-VMP, n = 350; VMP, n = 356), 391 (55.4%) were nonfrail (D-VMP, 187 [53.4%]; VMP, 204 [57.3%]) and 315 (44.6%) were frail (163 [46.6%]; 152 [42.7%]). After 40.1-months median follow-up, nonfrail patients had longer PFS and OS than frail patients, but benefits of D-VMP versus VMP were maintained across subgroups: PFS nonfrail (median, 45.7 vs. 19.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; P < .0001), frail (32.9 vs. 19.5 months; HR, 0.51; P < .0001); OS nonfrail (36-month rate, 83.6% vs. 74.5%), frail (71.4% vs. 59.0%). Improved greater than or equal to complete response and minimal residual disease (10 - 5 )-negativity rates were observed for D-VMP versus VMP across subgroups. The 2 most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (nonfrail: 39.2% [D-VMP] and 42.4% [VMP]; frail: 41.3% and 34.4%) and thrombocytopenia (nonfrail: 32.8% and 36.9%; frail: 36.9% and 39.1%)., Conclusion: Our findings support the clinical benefit of D-VMP in transplant-ineligible NDMM patients enrolled in ALCYONE, regardless of frailty status., (Copyright © 2021 Janssen Research & Development, LLC. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: CASSIOPEIA part 1 showed superior depth of response and significantly improved progression-free survival with daratumumab, bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-VTd) versus bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) as induction and consolidation in patients with autologous stem-cell transplant (ASCT)-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. In part 2, we compared daratumumab maintenance versus observation only., Methods: CASSIOPEIA is a two-part, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial of patients aged 18-65 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, done in 111 European academic and community practice centres. In part 1, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to induction and consolidation with D-VTd or VTd. Patients still on study who had a partial response or better were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web-response system to daratumumab 16 mg/kg intravenously every 8 weeks (a reduced frequency compared with standard daratumumab long-term dosing) or observation only for up to 2 years. Stratification factors were induction treatment and depth of response in part 1. The part 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival from second randomisation. This preplanned interim analysis of progression-free survival was done after 281 events and shall be considered the primary analysis of progression-free survival. Sponsor personnel and designees who were involved in the analysis were masked to treatment group until the independent data monitoring committee recommended that the preplanned interim analysis be considered the main analysis of progression-free survival in part 2. Otherwise, treatment assignments were unmasked. The interaction between induction and consolidation and maintenance was tested at a two-sided significance level of 0·05 by a stratified Cox regression model that included the interaction term between maintenance treatment and induction and consolidation treatment. Efficacy analyses were done in the maintenance-specific intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who underwent second randomisation. Safety was analysed in all patients in the daratumumab group who received at least one dose and all patients randomly assigned to observation only. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02541383. Long-term follow-up is ongoing and the trial is closed to new participants., Findings: Between May 30, 2016, and June 18, 2018, 886 patients (458 [84%] of 543 in the D-VTd group and 428 [79%] of 542 in the VTd group) were randomly assigned to daratumumab maintenance (n=442) or observation only (n=444). At a median follow-up of 35·4 months (IQR 30·2-39·9) from second randomisation, median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI not evaluable [NE]-NE) with daratumumab versus 46·7 months (40·0-NE) with observation only (hazard ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·42-0·68, p<0·0001). A prespecified analysis of progression-free survival results showed a significant interaction between maintenance and induction and consolidation therapy (p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were lymphopenia (16 [4%] of 440 patients in the daratumumab group vs eight [2%] of 444 patients in the observation-only group), hypertension (13 [3%] vs seven [2%]), and neutropenia (nine [2%] vs ten [2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 100 (23%) patients in the daratumumab group and 84 (19%) patients in the observation-only group. In the daratumumab group, two adverse events led to death (septic shock and natural killer-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma); both were related to treatment., Interpretation: Daratumumab maintenance every 8 weeks for 2 years significantly reduced the risk of disease progression or death compared with observation only. Longer follow-up and other ongoing studies will shed further light on the optimal daratumumab-containing post-ASCT maintenance treatment strategy., Funding: Janssen Research & Development, the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome, and the Dutch-Belgian Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests PM reports personal fees from Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, Janssen, and AbbVie, outside the submitted work. CH reports personal fees from Janssen, AbbVie, Amgen, and Celgene, outside the submitted work. AP reports personal fees from Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Sanofi, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. BA reports grants from Amgen, Celgene, Sanofi, and Janssen, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Amgen, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, Takeda, and Janssen, outside the submitted work; and advisory board participation from Amgen, Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. KB reports grants from Celgene outside the submitted work; personal fees from Celgene, Janssen, Takeda, and Amgen, outside the submitted work; and non-financial support from Celgene, AbbVie, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. SZ reports grants from Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda, during the conduct of the study. MD reports grants from Celgene and Janssen during the conduct of the study; participation on an advisory board for Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Sanofi, and Oncopeptides, outside the submitted work. TD reports grants from Celgene and Janssen, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees and advisory board participation from Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, and Amgen, outside of the submitted work. CD reports personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitted work. TF reports personal fees from Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Takeda, Amgen, Roche, Karyopharm, Sanofi, and Oncopeptides, outside the submitted work. CS reports personal fees from Celgene, outside the submitted work. MMo reports grants from Stemline, BMS, Amgen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen, GSK, Sanofi, and Celgene; non-financial support from Stemline, BMS, Amgen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen, GSK, Sanofi, and Celgene; and personal fees from Stemline, BMS, Amgen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen, GSK, Sanofi, and Celgene, outside the submitted work. LK reports personal fees from Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, and AbbVie, outside the submitted work. XL reports personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitted work. MMa reports personal fees from and advisory board participation for Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. A-MS reports personal fees from Celgene outside the submitted work. NWCJvdD reports grants from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, and Novartis, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Bayer, Roche, Servier, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. AB reports personal fees from Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Bristol Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. CT reports personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitter work. MR reports grants from Janssen, during the conduct of the study; personal fees and travel support from Celgene, Amgen, Sanofi, Takeda, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. M-DL reports grants from AbbVie, Amgen, Janssen, Roche, and Takeda, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees and advisory board participation from AbbVie, Janssen, Roche, and Takeda, outside the submitted work. TA reports employment and equity ownership from Genmab. MK reports employment with Janssen. KZ reports employment with Janssen. CdB reports employment and equity ownership from Janssen. SV reports employment with Janssen. TK reports employment with Janssen. VV reports employment with Janssen. JV reports employment with Janssen. HA-L reports grants from Celgene and Janssen, during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Celgene, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Sanofi, and Janssen, outside the submitted work. PS reports personal fees from Celgene and Janssen, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Selinexor is an oral, selective nuclear export inhibitor. STORM was a phase 2b, single-arm, open-label, multicenter trial of selinexor with low dose dexamethasone in patients with penta-exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) that met its primary endpoint, with overall response of 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 19 to 35%). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint measured using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM). This study examines impact of selinexor treatment on HRQoL of patients treated in STORM and reports two approaches to calculate minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM., Methods: FACT-MM data were collected at baseline, on day 1 of each 4-week treatment cycle, and at end of treatment (EOT). Changes from baseline were analyzed for the FACT-MM total score, FACT-trial outcome index (TOI), FACT-General (FACT-G), and the MM-specific domain using mixed-effects regression models. Two approaches for evaluating minimal clinically important differences were explored: the first defined as 10% of the instrument range, and the second based on estimated mean baseline differences between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores. Post-hoc difference analysis compared change in scores from baseline to EOT for treatment responders and non-responders., Results: Eighty patients were included in the analysis; the mean number of prior therapies was 7.9 (standard deviation [SD] 3.1), and mean duration of myeloma was 7.6 years (SD 3.4). Each exploratory minimal clinically important difference threshold yielded consistent results whereby most patients did not experience HRQoL decline during the first six cycles of treatment (range: 53.9 to 75.7% for the first approach; range: 52.6 to 72.9% for the second). Treatment responders experienced less decline in HRQoL from baseline to EOT than non-responders, which was significant for the FACT-G, but not for other scores., Conclusion: The majority of patients did not experience decline in HRQoL based on minimal clinically important differences during early cycles of treatment with selinexor and dexamethasone in the STORM trial. An anchor-based approach utilizing patient-level data (ECOG PS score) to define minimal clinically important differences for the FACT-MM gave consistent results with a distribution-based approach., Trial Registration: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the trial-ID NCT02336815 on January 8, 2015., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: In the phase III ALCYONE trial, daratumumab plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) significantly improved overall response rate and progression-free status compared with VMP alone in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Here, we present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from ALCYONE., Methods: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (EORTC QLQ-C30) and EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire were administered at baseline, every 3 months (year 1) and every 6 months (until progression). Treatment effects were assessed using a repeated-measures, mixed-effects model., Results: Compliance with PRO assessments was comparable at baseline (> 90%) and throughout study (> 76%) for both treatment groups. Improvements from baseline were observed in both groups for EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status (GHS), most functional scales, symptom scales and EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale (VAS). Between-group differences were significant for GHS (p = 0.0240) and VAS (p = 0.0160) at month 3. Improvements in pain were clinically meaningful in both groups at all assessment time points. Cognitive function declined in both groups, but the magnitude of the decline was not clinically meaningful., Conclusions: Patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM demonstrated early and continuous improvements in health-related quality of life, including improvements in functioning and symptoms, following treatment with D-VMP or VMP., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02195479 , registered September 21, 2014.

Background: Standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma includes combination therapies for patients who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. At the primary analysis for progression-free survival of the phase 3 ALCYONE trial, progression-free survival was significantly longer with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) alone in patients with transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here we report updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified, interim, overall survival analysis of ALCYONE with more than 36 months of follow-up., Methods: ALCYONE was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients between Feb 9, 2015, and July 14, 2016, at 162 sites in 25 countries across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation, because of their age (≥65 years) or because of substantial comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and by permuted block randomisation to receive D-VMP or VMP. An interactive web-based randomisation system was used. Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. There was no masking to treatment assignments. All patients received up to nine 6-week cycles of subcutaneous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m 2 of body surface area on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 of cycle one and on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of cycles two through nine), oral melphalan (9 mg/m 2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle), and oral prednisone (60 mg/m 2 once daily on days 1 through 4 of each cycle). Patients in the D-VMP group also received intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg of bodyweight, once weekly during cycle one, once every 3 weeks in cycles two through nine, and once every 4 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which has been reported previously. Results presented are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. The primary analysis population (including for overall survival) was the intention-to-treat population of all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment. The safety population included patients who received any dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02195479., Findings: 706 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (350 to the D-VMP group, 356 to the VMP group). At a median follow-up of 40·1 months (IQR 37·4-43·1), a significant benefit in overall survival was observed for the D-VMP group. The hazard ratio (HR) for death in the D-VMP group compared with the VMP group was 0·60 (95% CI 0·46-0·80; p=0·0003). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the 36-month rate of overall survival was 78·0% (95% CI 73·2-82·0) in the D-VMP group and 67·9% (62·6-72·6) in the VMP group. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint, remained significantly improved for the D-VMP group (HR 0·42 [0·34-0·51]; p<0·0001). The most frequent adverse events during maintenance daratumumab monotherapy in patients in the D-VMP group were respiratory infections (54 [19%] of 278 patients had upper respiratory tract infections; 42 [15%] had bronchitis, 34 [12%] had viral upper respiratory tract infections), cough (34 [12%]), and diarrhoea (28 [10%])., Interpretation: D-VMP prolonged overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. With more than 3 years of follow-up, the D-VMP group continued to show significant improvement in progression-free survival, with no new safety concerns., Funding: Janssen Research & Development., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Single agent daratumumab has shown clinical activity in relapsed, refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome 2014-04 trial was designed to further investigate daratumumab in combination with dexamethasone in triple RRMM patients. Patients received daratumumab infusions in combination with weekly dexamethasone until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Fifty-seven patients were included in the trial and evaluable for response. The overall response rate and the clinical benefit rate were 33% (n = 19) and 48% (n = 27), respectively. Five (8·8%) patients achieved a very good partial response or better. The median time to response was 4 weeks. For responding patients, the median progression-free survival was 6·6 months, compared to 3·7 months (3·0-5·5) for those with a minimal or stable disease. The median overall survival (OS) for all patients was 16·7 months (11·2-24·0). For responding patients, the median OS was 23·23 months, whereas that of patients with progressive disease was 2·97 months. The incidence of infusion-related reactions was 37%; all cases were manageable and did not lead to dose reduction or permanent treatment discontinuation. These data demonstrate that treatment with daratumumab and dexamethasone results in a meaningful long-term benefit with an acceptable safety profile for patients with triple RRMM., (© 2019 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Selinexor, a selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound that blocks exportin 1 (XPO1) and forces nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibits nuclear factor κB, and reduces oncoprotein messenger RNA translation, is a potential novel treatment for myeloma that is refractory to current therapeutic options., Methods: We administered oral selinexor (80 mg) plus dexamethasone (20 mg) twice weekly to patients with myeloma who had previous exposure to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, daratumumab, and an alkylating agent and had disease refractory to at least one proteasome inhibitor, one immunomodulatory agent, and daratumumab (triple-class refractory). The primary end point was overall response, defined as a partial response or better, with response assessed by an independent review committee. Clinical benefit, defined as a minimal response or better, was a secondary end point., Results: A total of 122 patients in the United States and Europe were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (primary analysis), and 123 were included in the safety population. The median age was 65 years, and the median number of previous regimens was 7; a total of 53% of the patients had high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. A partial response or better was observed in 26% of patients (95% confidence interval, 19 to 35), including two stringent complete responses; 39% of patients had a minimal response or better. The median duration of response was 4.4 months, median progression-free survival was 3.7 months, and median overall survival was 8.6 months. Fatigue, nausea, and decreased appetite were common and were typically grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 events were noted in up to 25% of patients, and no grade 4 events were reported). Thrombocytopenia occurred in 73% of the patients (grade 3 in 25% and grade 4 in 33%). Thrombocytopenia led to bleeding events of grade 3 or higher in 6 patients., Conclusions: Selinexor-dexamethasone resulted in objective treatment responses in patients with myeloma refractory to currently available therapies. (Funded by Karyopharm Therapeutics; STORM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02336815.)., (Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) plus autologous stem-cell transplantation is standard treatment in Europe for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We evaluated whether the addition of daratumumab to VTd before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation would improve stringent complete response rate in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma., Methods: In this two-part, randomised, open-label, phase 3 CASSIOPEIA trial, we recruited transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma at 111 European sites. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive four pre-transplant induction and two post-transplant consolidation cycles of VTd alone (VTd group) or in combination with daratumumab (D-VTd group). The primary endpoint of part 1 was stringent complete response assessed 100 days after transplantation. Part 2 (maintenance) is ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02541383., Findings: Between Sept 22, 2015, and Aug 1, 2017, 1085 patients were enrolled at 111 European sites and were randomly assigned to the D-VTd group (n=543) or the VTd group (n=542). At day 100 after transplantation, 157 (29%) of 543 patients in the D-VTd group and 110 (20%) of 542 patients in the VTd group in the intention-to-treat population had achieved a stringent complete response (odds ratio 1·60, 95% CI 1·21-2·12, p=0·0010). 211 (39%) patients in the D-VTd group versus 141 (26%) in the VTd group achieved a complete response or better, and 346 (64%) of 543 versus 236 (44%) of 542 achieved minimal residual disease-negativity (10 -5 sensitivity threshold, assessed by multiparametric flow cytometry; both p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival from first randomisation was not reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·47, 95% CI 0·33-0·67, p<0·0001). 46 deaths on study were observed (14 vs 32, 0·43, 95% CI 0·23-0·80). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (28% vs 15%), lymphopenia (17% vs 10%), and stomatitis (13% vs 16%)., Interpretation: D-VTd before and after autologous stem-cell transplantation improved depth of response and progression-free survival with acceptable safety. CASSIOPEIA is the first study showing the clinical benefit of daratumumab plus standard of care in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma., Funding: The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome and Dutch-Belgian Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The introduction of novel agents has led to major improvements in clinical outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma. To shorten evaluation times for new treatments, health agencies are currently examining minimal residual disease (MRD) as a surrogate end point in clinical trials. We assessed the prognostic value of MRD, measured during maintenance therapy by next-generation sequencing (NGS). MRD negativity was defined as the absence of tumor plasma cell within 1 000 000 bone marrow cells (<10 -6 ). Data were analyzed from a recent clinical trial that evaluated the role of transplantation in newly diagnosed myeloma patients treated with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD). MRD negativity was achieved at least once during maintenance in 127 patients (25%). At the start of maintenance therapy, MRD was a strong prognostic factor for both progression-free survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.34; P < .001) and overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.54; P = .001). Patients who were MRD negative had a higher probability of prolonged progression-free survival than patients with detectable residual disease, regardless of treatment group (RVD vs transplant), cytogenetic risk profile, or International Staging System disease stage at diagnosis. These results were similar after completion of maintenance therapy. Our findings confirm the value of MRD status, as determined by NGS, as a prognostic biomarker in multiple myeloma, and suggest that this approach could be used to adapt treatment strategies in future clinical trials., (© 2018 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: The combination of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Daratumumab has shown efficacy in combination with standard-of-care regimens in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Methods: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 706 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation to receive nine cycles of bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone either alone (control group) or with daratumumab (daratumumab group) until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival., Results: At a median follow-up of 16.5 months in a prespecified interim analysis, the 18-month progression-free survival rate was 71.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.5 to 76.8) in the daratumumab group and 50.2% (95% CI, 43.2 to 56.7) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.65; P<0.001). The overall response rate was 90.9% in the daratumumab group, as compared with 73.9% in the control group (P<0.001), and the rate of complete response or better (including stringent complete response) was 42.6%, versus 24.4% (P<0.001). In the daratumumab group, 22.3% of the patients were negative for minimal residual disease (at a threshold of 1 tumor cell per 10 5 white cells), as compared with 6.2% of those in the control group (P<0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were hematologic: neutropenia (in 39.9% of the patients in the daratumumab group and in 38.7% of those in the control group), thrombocytopenia (in 34.4% and 37.6%, respectively), and anemia (in 15.9% and 19.8%, respectively). The rate of grade 3 or 4 infections was 23.1% in the daratumumab group and 14.7% in the control group; the rate of treatment discontinuation due to infections was 0.9% and 1.4%, respectively. Daratumumab-associated infusion-related reactions occurred in 27.7% of the patients., Conclusions: Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, daratumumab combined with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone resulted in a lower risk of disease progression or death than the same regimen without daratumumab. The daratumumab-containing regimen was associated with more grade 3 or 4 infections. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ALCYONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02195479 .).

Objectives: Recently, daratumumab has been included in the therapeutic strategies for myeloma patients. This molecule is an antibody directed against CD38, strongly expressed on plasma cells. Nevertheless, as CD38 is also present on erythrocyte membrane, daratumumab interferes with immunohaematological tests, complicating the selection of compatible blood., Methods: A total of 14 patients treated by daratumumab have been followed in our transfusion laboratory. Among them, 11 have been transfused. Dithiotreitol (DTT) has been used to inhibit the daratumumab's interference, in the pre-transfusion tests (irregular antibody screening and cross-match)., Results: The red blood cell treatment with DTT has been very efficacious to inhibit the daratumumab's interference in 13 patients out of 14. Some precautionary measures had to be taken into account, especially the pH and the storage conditions. An extended pheno/genotype was an additional security element in the selection of compatible blood. To simplify and to optimize the laboratory practices, a decisional flow chart has been written., Conclusion: DTT red blood cell treatment is very useful and efficacious in the pre-transfusion tests of patients treated with daratumumab. It allows to avoid the selection of blood bags only on the basis of an extended pheno/genotype, what is more secure and more ethical with respect to other at higher risk patients. A clear decisional flow chart allows a quality assurance gait. Collaboration with physicians is essential., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

In newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM), patients ineligible for front-line autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), melphalan and prednisone (MP) with thalidomide (MPT) or bortezomib (VMP) are standard first-line therapeutic options. Despite new treatment regimens incorporating bortezomib or lenalidomide, MM remains incurable. The FIRST study demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the combination of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) until progression vs. MPT in transplant-ineligible ndMM patients. However, to date no head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared Rd or MPT versus VMP. We conducted a network meta-analysis using RCTs identified through a systematic literature review to evaluate the relative efficacy of Rd versus other regimens on survival endpoints in previously untreated MM patients ineligible for ASCT. In this analysis, Rd was associated with a significant PFS and survival advantage versus other first-line treatments (VMP, MPT, MP), challenging the role of alkylators in this setting.

Guidelines for monitoring multiple myeloma (MM) patients expressing light chains only (light-chain MM [LCMM]) rely on measurements of monoclonal protein in urine. Alternatively, serum free light chain (sFLC) measurements have better sensitivity over urine methods, however, demonstration that improved sensitivity provides any clinical benefit is lacking. Here, we compared performance of serum and urine measurements in 113 (72κ, 41λ) newly diagnosed LCMM patients enrolled in the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome (IFM) 2009 trial. All diagnostic samples (100%) had an abnormal κ:λ sFLC ratio, and involved (monoclonal) FLC (iFLC) expressed at levels deemed measurable for monitoring (≥100 mg/L). By contrast, only 64% patients had measurable levels of monoclonal protein (≥200 mg per 24 hours) in urine protein electrophoresis (UPEP). After 1 and 3 treatment cycles, iFLC remained elevated in 71% and 46% of patients, respectively, whereas UPEP reported a positive result in 37% and 18%; all of the patients with positive UPEP at cycle 3 also had elevated iFLC levels. Importantly, elevated iFLC or an abnormal κ:λ sFLC ratio after 3 treatment cycles associated with poorer progression-free survival (P = .006 and P < .0001, respectively), whereas positive UPEP or urine immunofixation electrophoresis (uIFE) did not. In addition, patients with an abnormal κ:λ sFLC ratio had poorer overall survival (P = .022). Finally, early normalization of κ:λ sFLC ratio but not negative uIFE predicted achieving negative minimal residual disease, as determined by flow cytometry, after consolidation therapy (100% positive predictive value). We conclude that improved sensitivity and prognostic value of serum over urine measurements provide a strong basis for recommending the former for monitoring LCMM patients., (© 2016 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Purpose This analysis of the FIRST trial in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) ineligible for stem-cell transplantation examined updated outcomes and impact of patient age. Patients and Methods Patients with untreated symptomatic MM were randomly assigned at a one-to-one-to-one ratio to lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous), Rd for 72 weeks (18 cycles; Rd18), or melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT; 72 weeks), stratified by age (≤ 75 v > 75 years), disease stage (International Staging System stage I/II v III), and country. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Rd continuous and MPT were primary comparators. Results Between August 21, 2008, and March 7, 2011, 1,623 patients were enrolled (Rd continuous, n = 535; Rd18, n = 541; MPT, n = 547), including 567 (35%) age older than 75 years. Higher rates of advanced-stage disease and renal impairment were observed in patients older than 75 versus 75 years of age or younger. Rd continuous reduced the risk of progression or death compared with MPT by 31% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.80; P < .001) overall, 36% (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.77; P < .001) in patients age 75 years or younger, and 20% (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.03; P = .084) in those age older than 75 years. Median overall survival was longer with Rd continuous than with MPT, including a 14-month difference in patients age older than 75 years. Progression-free survival with Rd18 was similar to that with MPT, and overall survival with Rd18 was marginally inferior to that with Rd continuous. Rates of grade 3 to 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were similar for Rd continuous-treated patients age 75 years or older and those age older than 75 years; however, older patients had more frequent lenalidomide dose reductions. Conclusion Results support Rd continuous treatment as a new standard of care for stem-cell transplantation-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM of all ages.

Patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have poor prognosis. The STRATUS study assessed safety and efficacy of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in the largest cohort to date of patients with RRMM. Patients who failed treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide and had adequate prior alkylator therapy were eligible. Pomalidomide 4 mg was given on days 1-21 of 28-day cycles with low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged >75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Safety was the primary end point; secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Among 682 patients enrolled, median age was 66 years, and median time since diagnosis was 5.3 years. Median number of prior regimens was 5. Most patients were refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib (80.2%). Median follow-up was 16.8 months; median duration of treatment was 4.9 months. Most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia [49.7%], anemia [33.0%], and thrombocytopenia [24.1%]). Most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were pneumonia (10.9%) and fatigue (5.9%). Grade 3/4 venous thromboembolism and peripheral neuropathy were rare (1.6% each). The ORR was 32.6%, and the median DOR was 7.4 months. Median PFS and OS were 4.6 months and 11.9 months, respectively. We present the largest trial to date evaluating pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with RRMM, further confirming that this regimen offers clinically meaningful benefit and is generally well tolerated. www.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01712789., (© 2016 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Purpose: To study the treatment patterns, effectiveness and safety of zoledronic acid (ZOL) beyond 2 years of therapy, given the paucity of data on long-term treatment in daily clinical practice., Methods: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) or solid tumor bone metastases (STM) and at least 24 months of regular q3-4w ZOL therapy were followed prospectively for an additional 18 months beyond the 24 months required for study entry. End-points included ZOL exposure, incidence of skeletal related events (SRE), and safety., Results: In all, 298 evaluable patients were enrolled. The mean continuation rate of ZOL was 90.6%. Exposure to ZOL decreased with time in all patients, but was lower (50.0% vs. 67.6%; p<0.001) and with higher discontinuation rates (incidence rate ratio [IRR]=1.95; p=0.002) in MM compared to the STM group. ZOL suppressed the rate of SREs similarly during the study as compared to before inclusion (0.12 vs. 0.13 events per person-year; p=0.7). At 18 months, 84.5% remained SRE-free. In STM patients, persistent ZOL therapy was associated with lower SRE risk (hazard ratio [HR]=0.42; p=0.01), but not in MM. Renal deterioration occurred in 3.7% and osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) developed in 6.0%, with dental trauma increasing ONJ risk (HR=4.67; p=0.002)., Conclusions: Beyond 2 years of therapy, treatment patterns of ZOL were heterogeneous and SRE rates were low. The safety profile of ZOL was acceptable, and interrupting ZOL in patients with solid tumors was associated with a higher risk of SREs.

The prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is generally estimated at 3.4% in the general population over 50 years, and its incidence increases with age. MGUS represents a preneoplastic entity that can transform into multiple myeloma or other lymphoproliferative disorders. The risk of malignant transformation is estimated at 1% per year and persists over time. Predictors of malignant transformation have been identified such as the heavy chain isotype, The level of monoclonal proteins, increasing levels of the monoclonal component during the first years off follow-up, the percentage of bone marrow plasmocytosis, the dosage of serum free light chains, the presence of immunophenotypically abnormal plasma cells, aneuploidy, and the presence of circulating plasma cells. Prognostic scores that combine certain of these factors have been proposed and allow the identification of high-risk patients. Their use could assist in tailoring the care for each patient, based on his/her risk profile.

Purpose: This prospective multicenter phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of a triple combination (bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone [VTD]) versus a dual combination (thalidomide-dexamethasone [TD]) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) progressing or relapsing after autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT)., Patients and Methods: Overall, 269 patients were randomly assigned to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2) intravenous bolus) or no bortezomib for 1 year, in combination with thalidomide (200 mg per day orally) and dexamethasone (40 mg orally once a day on 4 days once every 3 weeks). Bortezomib was administered on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 with a 10-day rest period (day 12 to day 21) for eight cycles (6 months), and then on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 with a 20-day rest period (day 23 to day 42) for four cycles (6 months)., Results: Median time to progression (primary end point) was significantly longer with VTD than TD (19.5 v13.8 months; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.80; P = .001), the complete response plus near-complete response rate was higher (45% v 21%; P 0.001), and the median duration of response was longer (17.9 v 13.4 months; P.04) [corrected].The 24-month survival rate was in favor of VTD (71% v 65%; P = .093). Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy was more frequent with VTD (29% v 12%; P = .001) as were the rates of grades 3 and 4 infection and thrombocytopenia., Conclusion: VTD was more effective than TD in the treatment of patients with MM with progressive or relapsing disease post-ASCT but was associated with a higher incidence of grade 3 neurotoxicity.

This multicentre prospective randomised trial compared the efficacy and safety of two doses of thalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma. The study was designed to test the non-inferior efficacy and to confirm the better tolerability of low-dose thalidomide as compared to a higher dose. Four hundred patients were randomly assigned to receive either 100 or 400 mg/day of thalidomide. Dexamethasone treatment was added in both arms for patients with stable disease or treatment failure at 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was 1-year overall survival (OS). Thalidomide 100 mg/day was better tolerated than 400 mg/day with less high-grade somnolence, constipation, nausea/vomiting and peripheral neuropathy (P < 0.001, P = 0.007, P = 0.03 and P = 0.007, respectively). In the per-protocol population (PP), the estimated 1-year OS rates were of 74.5% (n = 149) and 67.3% (n = 156) in the 400 and 100 groups, respectively. The upper limit of the difference between these rates was of 15.6% higher than the non-inferiority acceptable limit of 12.75%, and the hypothesis of non-inferiority of 100 could not be established (P = 0.14). On the other hand, when intent-to-treat (ITT) population was analysed, the non-inferiority was demonstrated because the 1-year OS rates were of 72.8% (n = 195) and 68.8% (n = 205) in the same groups, leading to an upper limit of the difference of 11.49% lower than the non-inferiority acceptable limit. In addition, in patients alive 12 weeks postrandomisation and those who received thalidomide plus dexamethasone, there were no significant differences in response rates, time to progression, progression-free survival and OS between the two groups. Collectively, low-dose thalidomide 100 mg/day has significant activity in advanced myeloma with an improved safety profile and can be a good salvage therapy in combination with dexamethasone., (© 2011 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD) as induction before high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) to a combination consisting of reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide plus dexamethasone (vtD) in patients with multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 199 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VD or vtD. After 4 cycles, the complete response (CR) rate was the same in both groups (13% in the vtD arm, 12% in the VD arm, P = .74). However, the CR plus very good partial response (VGPR) rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (49% vs 36%, P = .05). After ASCT, the CR plus VGPR rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (74% vs 58%, P = .02). The reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide translated into a reduced incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN): grade ≥ 2 PN were reported in 34% in the VD arm versus 14% in the vtD arm (P = .001). vtD, including reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide, yields higher VGPR rates compared with VD and can be considered a new effective triplet combination before HDT/ASCT.

The prognosis of multiple myeloma patients has significantly improved since the introduction of the novel agents thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide. We report the data of a medical need programme with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone, conducted in Belgium between August 2007 and March 2008, and including 98 relapsed refractory multiple myeloma patients. In addition to chemotherapy and steroids, all patients had received prior treatment with bortezomib, and 84% of them had been exposed to thalidomide. In 52 patients response data could be retrieved by post-hoc analysis. A partial remission or better was achieved in 52% (49% partial and 3% complete response) of patients, despite a median of 5 previous anti-myeloma treatment lines. Responses were rapid while the majority of patients received lenalidomide with once weekly (also called low-dose) dexamethasone. Treatment with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone did prolong overall survival by nearly half a year in this population with end-stage myeloma. Overall response and quality of response were independent of previous response to thalidomide and bortezomib, although the time to progression tended to be shorter in thalidomide- and bortezomib-refractory patients. It can be concluded that lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is an effective and safe treatment regimen in highly refractory multiple myeloma patients, and that these responses are irrespective of previous exposure or sensitivity to thalidomide and bortezomib.

In the 2005-01 trial, we have demonstrated that bortezomib-dexamethasone as induction therapy before autologous stem cell transplantation was superior to vincristine-adriamycin-dexamethasone. We conducted a post-hoc analysis to assess the prognostic impact of initial characteristics as well as response to therapy in patients enrolled in this study. Multivariate analysis showed that ISS stages 2 and 3 and achievement of response less than very good partial response (VGPR) both after induction therapy and after autologous stem cell transplantation were adverse prognostic factors for progression-free survival, the most important one being achievement of response less than VGPR after induction. Progression-free survival was significantly improved with bortezomib-dexamethasone induction therapy in patients with poor-risk cytogenetics and ISS stages 2 and 3 compared with vincristine-adriamycin-dexamethasone. In these 2 groups of patients, achievement of at least VGPR after induction was of major importance. This study is registered with EudraCT (https://eudract.ema.europa.eu; EUDRACT 2005-000537-38) and http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00200681).

Since the introduction of novel therapeutic agents including thalidomide, lenalidomide and bortezomib, the prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM) has significantly improved. These agents have been incorporated into numerous treatment schedules for newly diagnosed as well as more advanced MM patients. Hence, the therapeutic options for MM have become more complex and subject to rapid changes. The multiple myeloma study group (MMSG) of the Belgian Hematological Society has established recommendations for the treatment of MM as based on an extensive review of the literature which is also summarized in this paper. The recommendations are the result of a consensus opinion between haematologists with experience in the field and representing most haematology centres in Belgium. Where applicable, reimbursement criteria are also taken into account. The consensus recommendations should be a reference for use by clinical haematologists in daily practice.

Purpose: The prognostic impact of complete response (CR) achievement in multiple myeloma (MM) has been shown mostly in the context of autologous stem-cell transplantation. Other levels of response have been defined because, even with high-dose therapy, CR is a relatively rare event. The purpose of this study was to analyze the prognostic impact of very good partial response (VGPR) in patients treated with high-dose therapy., Patients and Methods: All patients were included in the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome 99-02 and 99-04 trials and treated with vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (VAD) induction therapy followed by double autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT). Best post-ASCT response assessment was available for 802 patients., Results: With a median follow-up of 67 months, median event-free survival (EFS) and 5-year EFS were 42 months and 34%, respectively, for 405 patients who achieved at least VGPR after ASCT versus 32 months and 26% in 288 patients who achieved only partial remission (P = .005). Five-year overall survival (OS) was significantly superior in patients achieving at least VGPR (74% v 61% P = .0017). In multivariate analysis, achievement of less than VGPR was an independent factor predicting shorter EFS and OS. Response to VAD had no impact on EFS and OS. The impact of VGPR achievement on EFS and OS was significant in patients with International Staging System stages 2 to 3 and for patients with poor-risk cytogenetics t(4;14) or del(17p)., Conclusion: In the context of ASCT, achievement of at least VGPR is a simple prognostic factor that has importance in intermediate and high-risk MM and can be informative in more patients than CR.

Purpose: Until recently, melphalan and prednisone were the standards of care in elderly patients with multiple myeloma. The addition of thalidomide to this combination demonstrated a survival benefit for patients age 65 to 75 years. This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial investigated the efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed myeloma., Patients and Methods: Between April 2002 and December 2006, 232 previously untreated patients with myeloma, age 75 years or older, were enrolled and 229 were randomly assigned to treatment. All patients received melphalan (0.2 mg/kg/d) plus prednisone (2 mg/kg/d) for 12 courses (day 1 to 4) every 6 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg/d of oral thalidomide (n = 113) or placebo (n = 116), continuously for 72 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, overall survival was significantly longer in patients who received melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide compared with those who received melphalan and prednisone plus placebo (median, 44.0 v 29.1 months; P = .028). Progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group (median, 24.1 v 18.5 months; P = .001). Two adverse events were significantly increased in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group: grade 2 to 4 peripheral neuropathy (20% v 5% in the melphalan and prednisone plus placebo group; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (23% v 9%; P = .003)., Conclusion: This trial confirms the superiority of the combination melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide over melphalan and prednisone alone for prolonging survival in very elderly patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicity was acceptable.

Background: In multiple myeloma, combination chemotherapy with melphalan plus prednisone is still regarded as the standard of care in elderly patients. We assessed whether the addition of thalidomide to this combination, or reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation, would improve survival., Methods: Between May 22, 2000, and Aug 8, 2005, 447 previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma, who were aged between 65 and 75 years, were randomly assigned to receive either melphalan and prednisone (MP; n=196), melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide (MPT; n=125), or reduced-intensity stem cell transplantation using melphalan 100 mg/m2 (MEL100; n=126). The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00367185., Findings: After a median follow-up of 51.5 months (IQR 34.4-63.2), median overall survival times were 33.2 months (13.8-54.8) for MP, 51.6 months (26.6-not reached) for MPT, and 38.3 months (13.0-61.6) for MEL100. The MPT regimen was associated with a significantly better overall survival than was the MP regimen (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.81, p=0.0006) or MEL100 regimen (0.69, 0.49-0.96, p=0.027). No difference was seen for MEL100 versus MP (0.86, 0.65-1.15, p=0.32)., Interpretation: The results of our trial provide strong evidence to indicate that the use of thalidomide in combination with melphalan and prednisone should, at present, be the reference treatment for previously untreated elderly patients with multiple myeloma.

One hundred de novo multiple myeloma patients with t(4;14) treated with double intensive therapy according to IFM99 protocols were retrospectively analyzed. The median overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were 41.4 and 21 months, respectively, as compared to 65 and 37 for patients included in the IFM99 trials without t(4;14) (P<10(-7)). We identified a subgroup of patients presenting at diagnosis with both low beta(2)-microglobulin <4 mg/l and high hemoglobin (Hb) >/=10 g/l (46% of the cases) with a median OS of 54.6 months and a median EFS of 26 months, respectively, which benefits from high-dose therapy (HDT); conversely patients with one or both adverse prognostic factor (high beta(2)-microglobulin and/or low Hb) had a poor outcome. The achievement of either complete response or very good partial response after HDT was also a powerful independent prognostic factor for both OS and EFS.

Newer chemotherapeutic protocols as well as high-dose chemotherapy have increased the response rate in myeloma. However, these treatments are not curative. Effective maintenance strategies are now required to prolong the duration of response. We conducted a randomized trial of maintenance treatment with thalidomide and pamidronate. Two months after high-dose therapy, 597 patients younger than age 65 years were randomly assigned to receive no maintenance (arm A), pamidronate (arm B), or pamidronate plus thalidomide (arm C). A complete or very good partial response was achieved by 55% of patients in arm A, 57% in arm B, and 67% in arm C (P = .03). The 3-year postrandomization probability of event-free survival was 36% in arm A, 37% in arm B, and 52% in arm C (P < .009). The 4-year postdiagnosis probability of survival was 77% in arm A, 74% in arm B, and 87% in arm C (P < .04). The proportion of patients who had skeletal events was 24% in arm A, 21% in arm B, and 18% in arm C (P = .4). Thalidomide is an effective maintenance therapy in patients with multiple myeloma. Maintenance treatment with pamidronate does not decrease the incidence of bone events.

Dexamethasone alone increases life expectancy in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM); however, no large randomized study has compared dexamethasone and dexamethasone-based regimens with standard melphalan-prednisone in newly diagnosed MM patients ineligible for high-dose therapy. In the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome (IFM) 95-01 trial, 488 patients aged 65 to 75 years were randomized between 4 regimens of treatment: melphalan-prednisone, dexamethasone alone, melphalan-dexamethasone, and dexamethasone-interferon alpha. Response rates at 6 months (except for complete response) were significantly higher among patients receiving melphalan-dexamethasone, and progression-free survival was significantly better among patients receiving melphalan (P < .001, for both comparisons), but there was no difference in overall survival between the 4 treatment groups. Moreover, the morbidity associated with dexamethasone-based regimens was significantly higher than with melphalan-prednisone, especially for severe pyogenic infections in the melphalan-dexamethasone arm and hemorrhage, severe diabetes, and gastrointestinal and psychiatric complications in the dexamethasone arms. Overall, these results indicated that dexamethasone should not be routinely recommended as first-line treatment in elderly patients with MM. In the context of the IFM 95-01 trial, the standard melphalan-prednisone remained the best treatment choice when efficacy and patient comfort were both considered. These results might be useful in the context of future combinations with innovative drugs.

The combination of high levels of beta2-microglobulin (beta2-m) and chromosome 13 deletion allows identification of a high-risk subgroup of patients with de novo multiple myeloma (MM). In this population of patients, we have evaluated the impact of a murine anti-interleukin 6 (anti-IL-6) monoclonal antibody (BE-8) as part of the second conditioning regimen in a multicenter prospective randomized trial of tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Conditioning for the first ASCT was accomplished with melphalan 200 mg/m2 and for the second one with melphalan 220 mg/m2 plus dexamethasone with or without BE-8 infusion. This trial included 219 patients, of whom 166 were randomized, 85 without BE-8 (arm A) and 81 with BE-8 (arm B). The median overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) times of the whole group of patients were 41 and 30 months, respectively. Response rates, OS, and EFS were not different between the 2 arms of the trial. OS at 54 months was 46% in arm A and 51% in arm B (P = .90); median EFS was 35 months in arm A and 31 in arm B (P = .39). In high-risk patients the dose intensity of melphalan at 420 mg/m2 led to encouraging results, but the addition of anti-IL-6 monoclonal antibody to the second conditioning regimen did not improve either OS nor EFS.

Background: We conducted a randomized trial of the treatment of multiple myeloma with high-dose chemotherapy followed by either one or two successive autologous stem-cell transplantations., Methods: At the time of diagnosis, 399 previously untreated patients under the age of 60 years were randomly assigned to receive a single or double transplant., Results: A complete or a very good partial response was achieved by 42 percent of patients in the single-transplant group and 50 percent of patients in the double-transplant group (P=0.10). The probability of surviving event-free for seven years after the diagnosis was 10 percent in the single-transplant group and 20 percent in the double-transplant group (P=0.03). The estimated overall seven-year survival rate was 21 percent in the single-transplant group and 42 percent in the double-transplant group (P=0.01). Among patients who did not have a very good partial response within three months after one transplantation, the probability of surviving seven years was 11 percent in the single-transplant group and 43 percent in the double-transplant group (P<0.001). Four factors were significantly related to survival: base-line serum levels of beta2-microglobulin (P<0.01) and lactate dehydrogenase (P<0.01), age (P<0.05), and treatment group (P<0.01)., Conclusions: As compared with a single autologous stem-cell transplantation after high-dose chemotherapy, double transplantation improves overall survival among patients with myeloma, especially those who do not have a very good partial response after undergoing one transplantation., (Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society)

High-dose therapy has become a common treatment for myeloma. The objective of this study (Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome [IFM] 9502 trial) was to compare in a prospective and randomized trial the 2 most widely used conditioning regimens before autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed symptomatic patients younger than 65 years old: 8 Gy total body irradiation plus 140 mg/m(2) melphalan (arm A) versus 200 mg/m(2) melphalan (arm B). A total of 282 evaluable patients were compared--140 in arm A and 142 in arm B. Baseline characteristics and disease response to 4 cycles of the VAD regimen performed before randomization and autologous stem cell transplantation were identical in the 2 treatment arms. In arm B, hematologic recovery was significantly faster for both the duration of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, transfusion requirements were also significantly lower, and the median duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter. In arm A, the incidence of severe mucositis was significantly increased. The median duration of event-free survival was similar in both arms (21 vs 20.5 months, P =.6), but the 45-month survival was 65.8% in arm B versus 45.5% in arm A (P =.05). This difference might be attributed in part to better salvage regimens after relapse in arm B compared with arm A. We conclude that 200 mg/m(2) melphalan is a less toxic and at least as effective conditioning regimen when compared with 8 Gy total body irradiation with 140 mg/m(2) melphalan. This regimen should be considered as the standard of care before autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma.

Genes of the MAGE, BAGE, GAGE, and LAGE-1/NY-ESO-1 families encode antigenic peptides that are presented by HLA class I molecules and that are recognized on human tumors by autologous cytolytic T lymphocytes. These genes are expressed in many solid tumor types but not in normal tissues, except male germline cells. Because the latter cells are devoid of HLA molecules, the derived antigens are strictly tumor-specific and should constitute safe immunogens for cancer immunotherapy. We detected a significant expression of these genes in a high proportion of bone marrow samples from patients with advanced multiple myeloma. This observation provides a basis for clinical trials aimed at inducing a cellular immune response directed at malignant plasma cells in advanced myeloma patients.

263 patients (median age 65+/-10 years) with multiple myeloma were treated with cyclophosphamide-prednisone. Out of this cohort, 103 patients had progressive disease and were randomly assigned to either VAD (vincristine, doxorubicin, dexamethasone; 50 cases) or VMBCP (vincristine, BCNU, cyclophosphamide, melphalan and prednisone; 53 cases). There were no statistical differences between the two groups with the respect to clinical, biological and radiological parameters. There was no difference in survival between the VAD and VMBCP groups. The 4 months response rate was similar in the two groups (50% VAD, 56% VMBCP). With multivariate analysis for survival (Cox model), two factors had a statistically significant impact: Karnofsky index (> 60) and albuminaemia (< 34 g/l). With both Karnofsky index > 60 and albuminaemia > or = 34 g/l, the median survival was 29 months v 2 months with a Karnofsky index < or = 60 and albuminaemia < 34 g/l (P<0.05). In conclusion, VAD or VMBCP had similar activity for salvage treatment in MM refractory or relapsing to first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide-prednisone.

A randomized trial has been performed in which 91 patients with stage III myeloma and additional severe criteria were randomly allocated to either VAD or VMBCP. No significant difference was noted between these two groups using the following criteria: response rate (VMBCP: 54%; VAD: 39%), impact on symptoms, median survival (VMBCP: 14 months, VAD: 17 months). However, toxic effects and refusal to pursue treatment were more frequent with VAD than with VMBCP (12 v 6). Therefore, in this trial, VMBCP appears to be more useful than VAD.

Neurological complications of myeloma are multiple and various. Cranial and intracranial locations have been rarely reported. They can be classified into three clinical groups: (1) cranial nerve palsies secondary to single or multiple lesions in the base of the skull, (2) intraorbital tumors, (3) intracranial tumors, either cranial myeloma extending intracranially or pure intracranial tumor (dural and/or cerebral). In our case, macroscopic and microscopic examination of the brain showed dural and cerebral involvement, confirmed by immunohistochemical studies. The radiological features are discussed (CT scan, MRI, angiography). To our knowledge, a single report of intracranial plasmacytoma documented by MRI has been reported in the literature.

Background: Trial data documenting ZOL treatment in pts with MBD from BC is currently limited to approximately 2 years of therapy. Materials and Methods: The prospective multicenter LOTUZ trial studied pts with multiple myeloma or MBD from a solid tumor (n = 298), and with at least 24 months of regular q3-4w ZOL therapy. Follow-up was 18 months and ZOL could be continued, interrupted or stopped at the discretion of the treating physician. End-points included ZOL exposure (% of expected per-label cumulative dose) and persistence (no treatment interruptions > 45 days), incidence of skeletal related events (SRE), and safety. Here we present the results for the subgroup of BC pts. Results: A total of 157 women (median age 62y; range 38-87y) were included in this analysis (204 person-years follow-up). The mean continuation rate of ZOL at any visit was 92.1% (95% CI 90.3-93.9), even though only 37.0% of pts who completed follow-up (n = 108) received uninterrupted per-label ZOL therapy. On average, exposure to ZOL decreased with 2.23% per 3 months on study (95% CI 0.93-3.54; p = 0.001). ZOL infusions were extended beyond 15 minutes in 36.1% (95% CI 33.7-38.6), and the treatment interval exceeded 4 weeks in 28.4% of pts (95% CI 19.6-38.6). Overall, ZOL continued to suppress the rate of SREs similarly during the 18 months study period (0.127 per person-year) as compared to the 18 months before inclusion (0.135 per person-year; p = 0.8). Radiation to bone occurred most frequently (46.2%) out of a total of 26 observed SREs. At 18 months, 83.3% (95% CI 75.6 - 88.8) of pts were SRE free. Both higher exposure to ZOL (HR 0.76 per 20% increase; 95% CI 0.62 - 0.93; p = 0.009) and persistent ZOL therapy (HR 0.26; 95% CI 0.11-0.60; p = 0.002) were associated with significantly lower SRE risk, compared to pts receiving lower dosed or interrupted therapy. Renal deterioration occurred in 6 pts (event rate 0.03 per person-year; 95% CI 0.01-0.07), with a numerically higher risk when ZOL dose was not adjusted for renal function (HR 3.54; 95% CI 0.65-19.4; p = 0.14), as observed in 11.5% of pts. Symptomatic hypocalcemia was not reported, even though adherence to supplemental calcium and vitamin D was only 15.9%. Acute phase reactions were infrequent (9.5%) and ONJ developed in 7 pts (4.5%). Invasive dental procedures or trauma numerically increased ONJ risk (HR 2.87; p = 0.3), with a risk of ONJ of 11.1% (95% CI 0.2 - 48.2%) after any of these events. Conclusion: The continuation rate of ZOL beyond two years of therapy is high and ZOL demonstrated continued effectiveness in maintaining low SRE rates. Nevertheless, ZOL treatment patterns were heterogeneous and deviating from per-label ZOL therapy resulted in a higher SRE risk. The long-term safety profile of ZOL was favorable, but adequate prevention strategies for ONJ remain important. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]