Search

Background: As lenalidomide becomes increasingly established for upfront treatment of multiple myeloma, patients refractory to this drug represent a population with an unmet need. The combination of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone has shown promising results in phase 1/2 trials of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of this triplet regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide. Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial at 133 hospitals and research centres in 21 countries. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years)with a diagnosis of multiple myeloma and measurable disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, who received one to three previous regimens, including a lenalidomide-containing regimen for at least two consecutive cycles. We randomly assigned patients (1:1)to bortezomib and dexamethasone with or without pomalidomide using a permutated blocked design in blocks of four, stratified according to age, number of previous regimens, and concentration of β2 microglobulin at screening. Bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2)was administered intravenously until protocol amendment 1 then either intravenously or subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for the first eight cycles and subsequently on days 1 and 8. Dexamethasone (20 mg [10 mg if age >75 years])was administered orally on the same days as bortezomib and the day after. Patients allocated pomalidomide received 4 mg orally on days 1–14. Treatment cycles were every 21 days. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, as assessed by an independent review committee. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01734928; patients are no longer being enrolled. Findings: Between Jan 7, 2013, and May 15, 2017, 559 patients were enrolled. 281 patients were assigned pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 278 were allocated bortezomib and dexamethasone. Median follow-up was 15·9 months (IQR 9·9–21·7). Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone significantly improved progression-free survival compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone (median 11·20 months [95% CI 9·66–13·73]vs 7·10 months [5·88–8·48]; hazard ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·49–0·77; p

We previously reported the results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of Filgrastim in patients with de novo AML undergoing induction and consolidation chemotherapy. The study demonstrated that Filgrastim was effective and well tolerated and had no impact on complete remission or survival. We now report follow-up data on these patients, assessing long-term effects with emphasis on prognostic indicators. After a median follow-up of 7 years, 434 (83%) patients were dead, 73 (14%) were alive, and 14 (3%) were lost to follow-up. The proportions of deaths were similar in the Filgrastim (83%) and placebo (84%) groups. No differences in median time to death (1.04 years Filgrastim, 1.13 years placebo; P = 0.97) or median disease-free survival (0.86 years Filgrastim, 0.79 years placebo; P = 0.52) were evident. Proportional hazard modeling identified age, performance status, and French-American-British subtype as independent predictors for survival (P < 0.001, P = 0.005, and P = 0.036, respectively), whereas cytogenetic status was not (P = 0.118). Filgrastim had no effect on overall survival in any of these subgroup analyses as none of the treatment comparisons were statistically significant. These findings indicate that Filgrastim can be effectively used to support patients with AML undergoing induction and consolidation chemotherapy without worsening long-term disease outcome.