Continuous treatment with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in Asia: subanalysis of the FIRST trial

Risk of thromboembolic events associated with different multiple myeloma regimens in Taiwan: a nested case-control study

Although novel agents for multiple myeloma (MM) have a better response rate and survival in both newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory MM patients, concerns regarding the association between MM treatments and thromboembolic events have been raised. The aim of this population-based study was to examine the association between different combinations of MM treatments and the risk of thromboembolic events. We conducted a nested case-control study using the Taiwan Cancer Registry (TCR) and National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Adult patients newly diagnosed with MM and treated with at least one of the immunomodulatory agents between 2008 and 2016 were identified. Among them, we further identified patients who developed thromboembolic events as cases and selected controls matched by age, sex and duration of MM diagnosis at a ratio of 1:5. The index date was defined as the day one year before the diagnosis date of thromboembolic events in the case group and the corresponding date in the control group. Conditional logistic regression was used to examine the association between different MM treatment regimens and the risk of thromboembolic events. A total of 4,180 newly diagnosed MM patients treated with at least one of the immunomodulatory agents were identified (mean age: 67.2 years; male: 55.7%). In this MM cohort, we further identified 388 cases and 1,940 matched controls (mean age: 71 years; male: 64.2%). The use of a thalidomide/bortezomib/steroid combination (odds ratio (OR) 2.95 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-5.95]), thalidomide monotherapy (OR 3.33; 95% CI, 1.59-6.94), and a thalidomide/steroid combination (OR 4.24; 95% CI, 2.00-8.98) were associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events. Other risk factors, particularly a history of thromboembolic events, including ischemic heart disease and pulmonary embolism, were significantly associated with increased risk of thromboembolic events. We found that the use of thalidomide alone and in specific combinations was associated with an increased risk of thromboembolic events.

Isatuximab-Pomalidomide-Dexamethasone Versus Pomalidomide-Dexamethasone in East Asian Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: ICARIA-MM Subgroup Analysis

BACKGROUND

In the pivotal phase III, randomized, multicenter ICARIA-MM study (NCT02990338), isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Isa-Pd) improved progression-free survival and overall response rate versus pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) in the overall population of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this predefined subgroup analysis, efficacy, and safety between East Asian patients and the overall population were assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 36 East Asian patients were included (Japanese, n = 13; Korean, n = 9; Taiwanese, n = 14). At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, median progression-free survival was not reached (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.80-not calculable) in the Isa-Pd arm and was 7.9 months (95% CI 2.90-not calculable) in the Pd arm. The hazard ratio for the between-group difference was 0.52 (95% CI 0.19-1.39), which was similar to the overall population (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI 0.44-0.82). No new safety signals were observed, except that a higher proportion of patients in the East Asian population experienced Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia compared with the overall population.

CONCLUSION

These results confirm the efficacy of Isa-Pd in East Asian patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, and the related safety data are consistent with those observed in the overall population and are manageable.

Efficacy and safety of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in Chinese patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: a multicenter, prospective, single-arm, phase 2 trial

Background

Pomalidomide in combination with dexamethasone has demonstrated positive results in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), but no data are available in China. We conducted a multicenter, single-arm trial to examine the efficacy and safety of bioequivalent generic pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in Chinese RRMM patients.

Methods

Adult (≥ 18 years of age) RRMM patients who progressed after at least two previous treatments, including bortezomib and lenalidomide, were eligible. Pomalidomide was given orally at 4 mg/day on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle. Dexamethasone was given at 40 mg/day (either orally or intravenously; 20 mg/day at 75 years or older) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment continued until disease progression or intolerable adverse events (AEs). The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR).

Results

Seventy-four patients were enrolled between February 2017 and February 2019. All patients had progressed within 60 days of their last therapy. 74.3% of the patients were resistant to lenalidomide, 31.1% had renal insufficiency and 33.8% had high-risk cytogenetic RRMM. The median follow-up duration was 33.0 months (range 31.1–34.8 months). The ORR was 37.8% in the overall analysis, 32.7% in lenalidomide-refractory patients, 36.0% in patients with high-risk cytogenetics and 34.8% in RRMM patients with renal impairment. The median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI 3.7–8.8 months). The median overall survival was 24.3 months (95% CI 14.4–41.1 months). The most common grade 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were neutropenia (63.5%), leukopenia (37.8%), thrombocytopenia (28.4%), and anemia (31.1%). Pulmonary infection (27.0%) was the most frequent grade 3 and 4 nonhematologic TEAE. No previously unreported AEs were observed. No venous thromboembolism was reported.

Conclusions

Pomalidomide in combination with low-dose dexamethasone is effective and safe in Chinese RRMM patients.

Trial registration

The study is registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR) (ChiCTR-OIC-17013234, first registered on 03/11/2017).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09802-y.

Cyclophosphamide addition to pomalidomide/dexamethasone is not necessarily associated with universal benefits in RRMM

In the backdrop of rapidly changing relapsed/refractory (RR) multiple myeloma (MM) treatment schema that mainly evolves around immunotherapies, it is easy to disregard more traditional drugs. Finding the best partner for pomalidomide, a potent third-generation immunomodulatory drug, is an important agenda we face as a community and cyclophosphamide addition has been used for outcomes augmentation. We carried out this real-world study to identify patients who will show durable response to pomalidomide and those who will benefit from cyclophosphamide addition. A total of 103 patients (57 in pomalidomide-dexamethasone [Pd] group versus 46 in pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone [PCd]) were studied. They were previously treated with bortezomib (98.1%) or lenalidomide (100%) and previous lines of therapy were median 3 lines. Significantly better overall response rate (ORR) was seen in the PCd (75.6%) than Pd (41.7%) group (p = 0.001), but no differences in survival outcomes. Subgroup analysis revealed that high-risk myeloma features, poor response to lenalidomide or bortezomib had superior ORRs when cyclophosphamide was added. Also, long-term responders for pomalidomide were associated with excellent response to previous IMiD treatments. Pomalidomide-based therapy was discontinued in five patients due to intolerance or adverse events, but there was no mortality during treatment. In conclusion, we showed that pomalidomide-based treatment is still relevant and can ensure durable response in RRMM setting, especially for patients who responded well to previous lenalidomide. Addition of cyclophosphamide to Pd is associated with better ORR, and can be positively considered in fit patients with high-risk MM, extramedullary disease, and less-than-satisfactory response to previous lenalidomide treatment.

Critical peritonitis secondary to gastrointestinal mucormycosis in a peritoneal dialysis patient: a case report

Immunodeficient patients are susceptible to systemic fungal infections; however, these rarely cause secondary peritonitis. A 66-year-old man with multiple myeloma and diabetes mellitus on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) presented with cloudy ascitic fluid. He had been treated with corticosteroids for 1 month for Tolosa-Hunt syndrome. We diagnosed peritoneal dialysis-related peritonitis caused by Enterococcus avium, removed the CAPD catheter, and initiated intravenous ampicillin. Computed tomography (CT) revealed an intramural gastric mass and a thinning ascending colon wall. Four days later, follow-up contrast-enhanced CT showed penetration of the ascending colon and rupture of the ileocolic artery. Emergency open surgery revealed hemorrhagic infarction with mucormycosis. We initiated intravenous liposomal amphotericin B 20 days after admission; however, he died 55 days later. Anatomical abnormalities, such as gastrointestinal perforation, should be considered for peritonitis in immunodeficient patients. Gastrointestinal mucormycosis is rare but fatal, resulting from a delay in diagnosis and consequent gastrointestinal perforation. For an early diagnosis and a favorable clinical outcome, it is important to consider the risk factors for mucormycosis, including corticosteroid use, diabetes, end-stage kidney diseases.

Identification of hub genes with prognostic values in multiple myeloma by bioinformatics analysis

PURPOSE

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignant disease with abnormal proliferation of clonal plasma cells. Hypoxia is an important factor in the pathogenesis and development of MM. However, the underlying mechanisms are not fully understood.

MATERIAL & METHODS

To determine hub genes related to hypoxia in MM, this study took integrated bioinformatics analysis with two expression datasets (GSE80140 and GSE80545) downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were filtrated under the condition of both p-value < 0.05 and [log2FoldChange (log2FC)] > 1. Then, gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes enrichment (KEGG) analysis, and protein-protein interaction (PPI) network construction were utilized to further explore these DEGs. PrognoScan evaluated all the candidate hub genes for survival analysis.

RESULTS

In total, three hub genes, including FH, TSTA3, and POLR3G, were screened out to be related to hypoxia in MM. Patients with the lower expression level of FH, TSTA3, and POLR3G have statistically significantly longer disease- specific survival (Cox p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We identified FH, TSTA3, and POLR3G as hub genes which can affect MM patients'outcome and new biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of MM. Further functional and mechanistic studies are need to develop in order to make them as potential target for clinical treatment.

Pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in treatment-naive multiple myeloma (KEYNOTE-185): subgroup analysis in Japanese patients

The global, randomized, open-label KEYNOTE-185 study closed early after an interim analysis showed an unfavorable benefit-risk profile with pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) versus Rd alone in treatment-naive, transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma. This subgroup analysis reported outcomes in the Japanese population. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab plus Rd or Rd alone, stratified by age and International Staging System. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Fifty-two Japanese patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus Rd (n = 27) or Rd (n = 25). The median follow-up was 7.2 months (range, 0.4-13.8). The median PFS was not reached (NR); 6-month PFS was 91.2% versus 86.2% with pembrolizumab plus Rd versus Rd [hazard ratio (HR), 0.31; 95% CI, 0.06-1.63]. The median overall survival (OS) was NR; 6-month OS was 96.2% versus 95.7% with pembrolizumab plus Rd versus Rd (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.03-3.72). With pembrolizumab plus Rd versus Rd, grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 70.4% versus 69.6% of patients; serious adverse events occurred in 40.7% versus 52.5%. Although in the Japanese subgroup of KEYNOTE-185 adding pembrolizumab to Rd did not show an unfavorable risk-benefit, the analysis is limited by short follow-up and small sample size, affecting generalizability of the results.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus does not increase the risk of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Epidemiological studies have shown that patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at a higher risk of secondary tumors. However, no consensus has been made about whether T2DM can increase the risk of multiple myeloma (MM).

Methods

We searched the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE and cross-checked the bibliography. Data quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Heterogeneity was calculated as the odds ratio (OR) using a random-effects model. Data were analyzed using Stata version 12.0 software.

Results

A total of 13 articles were selected into this meta-analysis. Initially, we found that diabetic patients had a higher risk of myeloma than non-diabetic patients (OR =1.60, 95% CI: 1.13–2.26, I²=98%, P=0.000). But the data in these articles were highly heterogeneous (I²>75%). Therefore, eight of the included articles showed a moderate heterogeneity (I²=71.6%). We used Galbraith heterogeneity map to analyze the causes of heterogeneity. Two articles with high heterogeneity were excluded. Then, we found the heterogeneity of the left six articles was reduced from moderate to mild (I²=45.9%, P=0.100). The final results of this meta-analysis showed that T2DM was not a risk factor for increased incidence of MM (OR =1.05, 95% CI: 0.83–1.33, I²=45.9%, P=0.100). Also, the subgroup analysis (case-control studies vs. cohort studies) showed no statistical difference (OR =1.19, 95% CI: 0.76–1.85, I²=1%, P=0.364; OR =1.00, 95% CI: 0.75–1.33, I²=71.2%, P=0.031; respectively).

Conclusions

T2DM is not a risk factor for the increased incidence of MM, a finding that should be validated with more strictly designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

The underreporting of phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data of older patients with cancer: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Inspired by the American Society of Clinical Oncology's recommendations to strengthen the evidence base for older adults with cancer, the purpose of this systematic review is to identify the reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events specific to older adults with cancer in Phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trials. This review also investigates the frequency with which these data points were reported in the literature to identify gaps in reporting and opportunities to expand the knowledge base on clinical outcomes for older adults with cancer.

METHODS

Chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data published from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 was reviewed. Manuscripts (n = 929) were identified based on keyword searches of EMBASE and PubMed. After removal of duplicates (n = 116) and articles that did not meet this study's inclusion criteria (n = 654), 159 articles were identified for review.

RESULTS

Reviewed papers were published in 36 different scientific journals and included twenty-five different cancer types. Of the 159 articles, 117 (73.6%) reported age-specific medians and 75 (47.2%) included stratifications of data by age. Treatment efficacy was reported in 96.2% of the articles with 39.9% reporting effectiveness of treatment by age. Reporting of adverse events was included in 84.9% of the articles with only 8.9% reporting these events stratified by age.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest inadequate reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events as well as basic descriptive statistics about the age distribution of study subjects. Conscious efforts are needed to address these deficiencies at every level of planning and conducting clinical trials as wells as reporting outcomes stratified by age. Ultimately, standardized reporting could lead to improved treatment decisions and outcomes for older adults with cancer.

Multiple drug combinations of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide for first-line treatment in adults with transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple myeloma is a bone marrow-based hematological malignancy accounting for approximately two per cent of cancers. First-line treatment for transplant-ineligible individuals consists of multiple drug combinations of bortezomib (V), lenalidomide (R), or thalidomide (T). However, access to these medicines is restricted in many countries worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To assess and compare the effectiveness and safety of multiple drug combinations of V, R, and T for adults with newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma and to inform an application for the inclusion of these medicines into the World Health Organization's (WHO) list of essential medicines.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL and MEDLINE, conference proceedings and study registries on 14 February 2019 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing multiple drug combinations of V, R and T for adults with newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing combination therapies of V, R, and T, plus melphalan and prednisone (MP) or dexamethasone (D) for first-line treatment of adults with transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma. We excluded trials including adults with relapsed or refractory disease, trials comparing drug therapies to other types of therapy and trials including second-generation novel agents.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included trials. As effect measures we used hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and risk ratios (RRs) for adverse events. An HR or RR < 1 indicates an advantage for the intervention compared to the main comparator MP. Where available, we extracted quality of life (QoL) data (scores of standardised questionnaires). Results quoted are from network meta-analysis (NMA) unless stated.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 studies (148 references) comprising 11,403 participants and 21 treatment regimens. Treatments were differentiated between restricted treatment duration (treatment with a pre-specified amount of cycles) and continuous therapy (treatment administered until disease progression, the person becomes intolerant to the drug, or treatment given for a prolonged period). Continuous therapies are indicated with a "c". Risk of bias was generally high across studies due to the open-label study design. Overall survival (OS) Evidence suggests that treatment with RD (HR 0.63 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.99), median OS 55.2 months (35.2 to 87.0)); TMP (HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.97), median OS: 46.4 months (35.9 to 60.0)); and VRDc (HR 0.49 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.92), median OS 71.0 months (37.8 to 133.8)) probably increases survival compared to median reported OS of 34.8 months with MP (moderate certainty). Treatment with VMP may result in a large increase in OS, compared to MP (HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.07), median OS 49.7 months (32.5 to 77.3)), low certainty). Progression-free survival (PFS) Treatment withRD (HR 0.65 (95% CI0.44 to 0.96), median PFS: 24.9 months (16.9 to 36.8)); TMP (HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.78), median PFS:25.7 months (20.8 to 32.4)); VMP (HR 0.56 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.90), median PFS: 28.9 months (18.0 to 46.3)); and VRDc (HR 0.34 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.58), median PFS: 47.6 months (27.9 to 81.0)) may result in a large increase in PFS (low certainty) compared to MP (median reported PFS: 16.2 months). Adverse events The risk of polyneuropathies may be lower with RD compared to treatment with MP (RR 0.57 (95% CI 0.16 to 1.99), risk for RD: 0.5% (0.1 to 1.8), mean reported risk for MP: 0.9% (10 of 1074 patients affected), low certainty). However, the CIs are also compatible with no difference or an increase in neuropathies. Treatment with TMP (RR 4.44 (95% CI1.77 to 11.11), risk: 4.0% (1.6 to 10.0)) and VMP (RR 88.22 (95% CI 5.36 to 1451.11), risk: 79.4% (4.8 to 1306.0)) probably results in a large increase in polyneuropathies compared to MP (moderate certainty). No study reported the amount of participants with grade ≥ 3 polyneuropathies for treatment with VRDc. VMP probably increases the proportion of participants with serious adverse events (SAEs) compared to MP (RR 1.28 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.54), risk for VMP: 46.2% (38.3 to 55.6), mean risk for MP: 36.1% (177 of 490 patients affected), moderate certainty). RD, TMP, and VRDc were not connected to MP in the network and the risk of SAEs could not be compared. Treatment with RD (RR 4.18 (95% CI 2.13 to 8.20), NMA-risk: 38.5% (19.6 to 75.4)); and TMP (RR 4.10 (95% CI 2.40 to 7.01), risk: 37.7% (22.1 to 64.5)) results in a large increase of withdrawals from the trial due to adverse events (high certainty) compared to MP (mean reported risk: 9.2% (77 of 837 patients withdrew)). The risk is probably slightly increased with VMP (RR 1.06 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.81), risk: 9.75% (5.8 to 16.7), moderate certainty), while it is much increased with VRDc (RR 8.92 (95% CI 3.82 to 20.84), risk: 82.1% (35.1 to 191.7), high certainty) compared to MP. Quality of life QoL was reported in four studies for seven different treatment regimens (MP, MPc, RD, RMP, RMPc, TMP, TMPc) and was measured with four different tools. Assessment and reporting differed between studies and could not be meta-analysed. However, all studies reported an improvement of QoL after initiation of anti-myeloma treatment for all assessed treatment regimens.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on our four pre-selected comparisons of interest, continuous treatment with VRD had the largest survival benefit compared with MP, while RD and TMP also probably considerably increase survival. However, treatment combinations of V, R, and T also substantially increase the incidence of AEs, and lead to a higher risk of treatment discontinuation. Their effectiveness and safety profiles may best be analysed in further randomised head-to-head trials. Further trials should focus on consistent reporting of safety outcomes and should use a standardised instrument to evaluate QoL to ensure comparability of treatment-combinations.

Pomalidomide and dexamethasone combination with additional cyclophosphamide in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (AMN001)-a trial by the Asian Myeloma Network

Pomalidomide is a third generation immunomodulatory drug which in combination with dexamethasone, has been shown to be active in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. However, the data in Asian patients remain limited. We conducted a prospective phase two clinical trial in major cancer centers in Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong to assess the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide and dexamethasone combination (PomDex) +/− cyclophosphamide in Asian patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who failed lenalidomide and bortezomib. Patients were treated with pomalidomide (4 mg daily for 21 days every 4 weeks) and dexamethasone (40 mg weekly). If there is less than a minimal response after three cycles of PomDex, cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m² can be added (PomCyDex). A total of 136 patients were enrolled. The median PFS was 9 and 10.8 months for the PomDex and PomCyDex group, respectively. The median OS was 16.3 months. This regimen appears to be active across age groups and prior lines of treatment. This combination was overall well tolerated with grade 3 and 4 adverse events of mainly cytopenias. PomDex is highly active and well-tolerated in Asian patients. The addition of cyclophosphamide can improve the response and outcomes further in patients with suboptimal response to PomDex.

Recent advances in the management of multiple myeloma: clinical impact based on resource-stratification. Consensus statement of the Asian Myeloma Network at the 16th international myeloma workshop

Predicated on our improved understanding of the disease biology, we have seen remarkable advances in the management of multiple myeloma over the past few years. Recently approved drugs have radically transformed the treatment paradigm and improved survivals of myeloma patients. The progress has necessitated revision of the diagnostic criteria, risk-stratification and response definition. The huge disparities in economy, healthcare infrastructure and access to novel drugs among different Asian countries will hinder the delivery of optimum myeloma care to patients managed in resource-constrained environments. In the light of the tremendous recent changes and evolution in myeloma management, it is timely that the resource-stratified guidelines from the Asian Myeloma Network be revised to provide updated recommendations for Asia physicians practicing under various healthcare reimbursement systems. This review will highlight the most recent advances and our recommendations on how they could be integrated in both resource-abundant and resource-constrained facilities.

Lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A phase II study

In the FIRST trial (MM‐020), lenalidomide plus low‐dose dexamethasone (Rd) reduced the risk of disease progression or death compared with combination melphalan–prednisone–thalidomide. As the FIRST trial did not include any Japanese patients, the efficacy and safety of continuous treatment with Rd was evaluated in 26 Japanese patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) in a single‐arm, multicenter, open‐label phase II trial (MM‐025). Patients received lenalidomide on days 1–21 of each 28‐day cycle, with a starting dose of 25 mg/day (dose adjusted for renal impairment), and 40 mg/day dexamethasone (dose adjusted for age) on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of each 28‐day cycle until disease progression or discontinuation for any reason. In the efficacy evaluable population, overall response rate was 87.5%, including 29.2% of patients who achieved a complete response/very good partial response. Median durations of response, progression‐free survival and overall survival have not been reached. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (23%) and anemia (19%). The efficacy and safety of Rd were consistent with data from larger studies, including the FIRST trial, thereby supporting the use of Rd continuous in Japanese patients with NDMM who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation.