Upfront bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone compared to bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone in multiple myeloma

Real-World Outcomes in Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Treated With Bortezomib/Cyclophosphamide/Dexamethasone and Bortezomib/Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone as Upfront Treatment

Introduction Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematological disorder characterized by aberrant multiplication of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow. The current mainstay of treatment for patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) is a triplet regimen with a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory imide, and dexamethasone. The two most common of these triplet regimens are VLD (bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone) and VCD (bortezomib/cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone). This study aims to compare the outcomes between these two therapies in transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Methods We conducted a retrospective study at the Aga Khan University Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. All NDMM transplant-ineligible patients either receiving VLD or VCD therapy between January 2015 and December 2022 were included in our study. Hematological parameters before and after treatment were obtained from hospital records. Response to treatment was classified according to the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) response criteria as either complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR), partial response (PR), minimal response (MR), stable disease (SD), or progressive disease (PD). The response to treatment as well as overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was compared between VCD and VLD therapy. A p-value of 0.05 or less was taken to be statistically significant. Results Twenty (23.8%) patients in the VCD group and 20 (23.0%) in the VLD group underwent complete remission. Seven (8.3%) patients experienced disease progression in the VCD group, while the figure stood at three (3.4%) in the VLD group. There was no statistically significant difference in the overall response rate between the VCD (58; 69.0%) and VLD (70; 80.5%) groups (p=0.086), a difference that was not statistically significant on the Chi-square test. OS was comparable between VCD (69.1 months, 95%CI: 61.3-77.0) and VLD (76.9 months, 95%CI: 69.0-85.0) therapies. Conclusions The study did not identify any statistically significant distinction in the treatment outcomes between the VCD and VLD regimens among NDMM patients ineligible for transplantation. Nevertheless, the study highlights the positive outcomes observed with both treatments in this specific patient cohort. This implies that either regimen could be deemed suitable as a treatment option for patients in low- and middle-income countries. Since both regimens demonstrate comparable effectiveness, assessing the cost-effectiveness of these regimens is crucial. Future research should also explore the economic aspects of the two treatment options.

Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRD) Treatment with Cytogenetic Risk-Based Maintenance in Transplant-Eligible Myeloma: A Phase 2 Multicenter Study by the Nordic Myeloma Study Group

Scarce data exist on double maintenance in transplant-eligible high-risk (HR) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. This prospective phase 2 study enrolled 120 transplant-eligible NDMM patients. The treatment consisted of four cycles of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRD) induction plus autologous stem cell transplantation followed by IRD consolidation and cytogenetic risk-based maintenance therapy with lenalidomide + ixazomib (IR) for HR patients and lenalidomide (R) alone for NHR patients. The main endpoint of the study was undetectable minimal residual disease (MRD) with sensitivity of <10-5 by flow cytometry at any time, and other endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We present the preplanned analysis after the last patient has been two years on maintenance. At any time during protocol treatment, 28% (34/120) had MRD < 10-5 at least once. At two years on maintenance, 66% of the patients in the HR group and 76% in the NHR group were progression-free (p = 0.395) and 36% (43/120) were CR or better, of which 42% (18/43) had undetectable flow MRD <10-5. Altogether 95% of the patients with sustained MRD <10-5, 82% of the patients who turned MRD-positive, and 61% of those with positive MRD had no disease progression at two years on maintenance (p < 0.001). To conclude, prolonged maintenance with all-oral ixazomib plus lenalidomide might improve PFS in HR patients.

Real-world data on induction therapy in patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: retrospective analysis of 598 cases from Kansai Myeloma Forum

To investigate the real-world clinical outcomes and management of novel drug-containing therapies for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients, we retrospectively analyzed data on the first-line treatment for newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible MM patients from Kansai Myeloma Forum, a registry network in Japan. A total of 598 patients treated with novel drugs between March 2007 and February 2018 were analyzed. Regimens used were VD (n = 305), Rd (n = 103), VMP (n = 97), VCD (n = 71), and VRd (n = 22). Younger patients tended to receive VRd or VCD, whereas the regimen with the highest median patient age was Rd. More than three-quarters of patients in the Rd group received a reduced dose of lenalidomide. The Rd and VRd groups had a relatively high incidence of infection and skin complications, and the VMP group had the highest incidence of peripheral neuropathy. Overall response rate did not differ significantly between regimens. Multivariate analysis in all patients revealed several poor prognostic factors, such as poor performance status. Novel drug-containing regimens for newly diagnosed MM showed a durable response with manageable AEs in the real-world setting.

Conditioning with melphalan 200 mg/m2 and subsequent ASCT improves progression-free and overall survival in elderly myeloma patients compared to standard of care

OBJECTIVES

Despite the effectiveness of newer drugs for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), the outcomes are further improved by subsequent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Data on effectiveness in older patients are limited. We compared outcomes in patients aged 65-75 years depending on whether they were treated with ASCT or not and compared those to outcomes in patients <65 years.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study. We compared progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all MM patients below and above the age of 65 years treated ± ASCT at the Karolinska University Hospital between 2010 and 2020. PFS and OS were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Variables affecting PFS and OS were evaluated using Cox regression model.

RESULTS

Both PFS and OS were improved in the group 65-75 years treated +ASCT compared to those treated pharmacologically (p = 0.008 and p < 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences between patients <65 years and those 65-75 years treated with ASCT.

CONCLUSION

The findings indicate that even patients >65 years should be evaluated as candidates for ASCT. An individualized approach supported by a frailty/geriatric assessment score could assist clinicians to select the appropriate treatment for each patient.

Radiomics Models Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Prediction of the Response to Bortezomib-Based Therapy in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Purpose. To identify significant radiomics features based on MRI and establish effective models for predicting the response to bortezomib-based regimens. Materials and Methods. In total, 95 MM patients treated with bortezomib-based therapy were enrolled, including 77 with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (BCD) and 18 with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD). Based on T1-weighted imaging (T1WI) and T2-weighted imaging with fat suppression (T2WI-fs), radiomics features were extracted and then selected. The random forest (RF), $k$ -nearest neighbor, support vector machine, logistic regression, decision tree, and Bayes models were built using the selected features. The predictive power of six models for response to BCD and VRD regimens were evaluated. The correlation between the selected features and progression-free survival (PFS) was also analyzed. Results. Four wavelet features were correlated with BCD treatment response. The six models all showed predictive power for BCD regimen (AUC: 0.84-0.896 in the training set, 0.801-0.885 in the validation set), and RF performed relatively better than others. Nevertheless, all the BCD-based models were incapable of predicting the VRD treatment response. The wavelet-HLH_firstorder_kurtosis was also associated with PFS (log-rank $P=0.019$ ). Conclusion. The four wavelet features were valuable biomarkers for predicting the response to BCD regimen. The six models based on these features showed predictive power, and RF was the best. One wavelet feature was also a survival-related biomarker. MRI-based radiomics had the potential to guide clinicians in MM management.

Impact of Induction with VCD vs. VRD on the Outcome of Patients with Multiple Myeloma After an Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

BACKGROUND

nduction therapy with a triplet regimen, followed by high-dose therapy and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT) is the standard of care for newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Bortezomib-dexamethasone with cyclophosphamide (VCD) or lenalidomide (VRD) are the most used induction regimens. However, previous studies comparing VCD and VRD showed disparate results.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this retrospective study was to compare the "real world" results of VCD and VRD, in transplant-eligible MM patients outside of a clinical trial.

METHODS/RESULTS

We identified 322 patients who received VRD or VCD induction before auto-HCT at our institution. All patients received melphalan conditioning and single-agent lenalidomide maintenance therapy. Overall, 114 patients received VCD and 208 received VRD. The median age at auto-HCT was 61.9 years (range, 33.9-79.6), with 35.4% (114/322) of the cohort being 65 years or older. The overall response rate was 99.7% post-auto-HCT, with a significantly lower complete remission rate as the final response in the VCD compared to the VRD group (34% vs. 53%, p=0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the best response rate of VGPR or better in the VCD compared to the VRD group (92% vs. 85%, p=0.078). The median duration of ≥VGPR was 50.0 months (95%CI: 42.0-69.1) for both cohorts and there was no difference between VCD and VRD (p=0.769; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.69-1.31). Median follow-up of survivors was 73 months. There was no difference in the relapse rate between VCD and VRD (p=0.749). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 48.7 months in the VCD and 44.6 months in the VRD group (p=0.858). Median overall survival (OS) was 103.8 months with VCD and 101.7 months with VRD (p=0.891). At 5 years, the PFS and OS were 38.1% and 76.9% for the VCD group, respectively, and 40.7% and 74.6% for the VRD group, respectively. On multivariate analysis for OS in the entire cohort, R-ISS I and post-auto-HCT best response of stringent complete response (sCR)/CR emerged as significant predictors of superior OS. There was no impact of the type of induction regimen on the OS in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Induction therapy with VCD compared to VRD was associated with a lower CR rate, but there was no difference in PFS or OS between the two regimens.

Impact of Induction Therapy with VRD versus VCD on Outcomes in Patients with Multiple Myeloma in Partial Response or Better Undergoing Upfront Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Bortezomib-based triplet regimens-specifically bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD) and bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD)-are the 2 most common induction regimens used in transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), with conflicting data on comparative efficacy and outcomes in this population. We compared long-term outcomes of patients with NDMM receiving VRD induction and those receiving VCD induction prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Patients registered with the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry were included if they had undergone ASCT for MM within 6 months of diagnosis between January 2013 and December 2018, received VRD or VCD induction, and achieved a pretransplantation partial or better response. Of 1135 patients, 914 received VRD and 221 received VCD. The patients receiving VCD were more likely to have renal impairment and International Staging System (ISS) stage III disease and less likely to receive full-dose melphalan (200 mg/m²) conditioning (69% versus 80%; P < .001). Very good partial response rates pretransplantation, post-transplantation, and at best response were not significantly different in the 2 groups. Maintenance use was more common after VRD induction (88% versus 76%; P < .001), with lenalidomide the most common agent (80% versus 63%). Patients in the VRD group had a higher rate of renal recovery (74% versus 43%; P < .001), possibly due to a rapid reduction of light chains in the VRD group or improvement in renal function with VCD, which allowed a switch over to VRD, as patients who switched were classified in the VRD group. Patients receiving VRD had better survival on univariate analysis, with a median progression-free survival (PFS) from transplantation of 44.6 months versus 34.1 months (P = .004) and median 5-year overall survival (OS) of 79% versus 60% (P < .001). Multivariate analysis showed no significant survival difference, with a hazard ratio for VCD versus VRD induction of 1.22 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.55; P = .10) for PFS and 1.33 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.92, P = .12) for OS. Maintenance use was independently associated with superior PFS and OS, along with ISS stage, cytogenetics, and pretransplantation response (PFS only). In patients with MM undergoing upfront ASCT after VRD or VCD induction, no independent survival difference was seen based on the induction therapy received after adjusting for other prognostic factors. The use of maintenance treatment was uniformly associated with superior outcomes. © 2021 American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc.

[Autologous stem cell transplantation improves outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma receiving proteasome inhibitors and lenalidomide treatment]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) on treatment response and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) receiving treatments with proteasome inhibitors and lenalidomide.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected the clinical data of newly diagnosed MM patients, who were eligible for ASCT and received proteasome inhibitors or lenalidomide-based treatment in our hospital from January, 2015 to December, 2019. The patients were divided into transplantation group and non-transplantation group, and in transplantation group, the patients received 4 to 6 courses of induction therapy with proteasome inhibitors or lenalidomide before ASCT, while those in the non-transplantation group received more than 8 courses of induction and consolidation therapy with proteasome inhibitors or lenalidomide-based regimens. The therapeutic efficacy and survival outcomes of the patinets were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients were enrolled in the study, including 48 (45.7%) in transplantation group and 57 (54.3%) in non-transplantation group. The two groups were matched for gender, age and treatment response after 4 courses of induction therapy (P > 0.05). The rate of optimal response before relapse differed significantly between the two groups (P=0.000), and the patients receiving ASCT had significantly higher rates of complete response (85.4% vs 54.4%, P= 0.001) and very good partial response or better (95.8% vs 73.7%, P=0.002) than those without ASCT. At the end of follow-up, the median progression-free survival in the transplantation group was not reached, as compared with 29 months in the nontransplantation group (P=0.013). The median overall survival (OS) in the two groups was not reached, but the OS was better in the transplant group than in the non-transplant group (P=0.022).

CONCLUSION

ASCT can further improve the depth of remission and survival outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed MM receiving treatments with proteasome inhibitors and lenalidomide.

Knowing the unknowns in high risk multiple myeloma

High risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) continues to portend worse outcomes despite the many advances in anti-myeloma therapeutics. The optimal approach to treatment is not clearly defined on account of the variable definitions of HRMM and the paucity of studies dedicated to the treatment of HRMM. In this review, we use a case-based approach to review the definitions of HRMM, and evaluate the evidence for induction, stem cell transplantation, and post-transplant therapy approaches for HRMM.

Treatment of Multiple Myeloma and the Role of Melphalan in the Era of Modern Therapies-Current Research and Clinical Approaches

Multiple myeloma (MM) accounts for 10% of all hematological malignancies, and it is the second most common hematological neoplasm for which chemotherapy is an important pharmacological treatment. High dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell transplantation remains the standard of treatment for transplant-eligible patients with MM. In this review, we describe aspects of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of melphalan therapy and related compounds. In addition, we describe the use of melphalan in innovative therapies for the treatment of MM, including the development of drug carriers to reduce systemic toxicity, combination therapy to improve the effectiveness of cancer therapy, and the chemical modification of the melphalan molecule to improve antitumor activity.

Efficacy and tolerability of VCD chemotherapy in a UK real-world dataset of elderly transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed myeloma patients

OBJECTIVE

There are limited data on the efficacy and tolerability of VCD chemotherapy in transplant-non-eligible (TNE) newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM) patients. In this retrospective study, we set out to evaluate this triplet combination in this setting across Thames Valley Cancer Network (UK).

METHODS

The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary outcomes included event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

In a total cohort of 158 patients, ORR for total cohort was 72.1%. Median EFS was 10.5 months, and for subgroups by age (<75:11.7 vs ≥75:10.3 months, P = .124), by Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI) (<5:11.1 vs ≥5:8.2 months, P = .345). The 4-month landmark analysis showed the following median EFS results: by cumulative bortezomib dose (≥26 mg/m² : 9.0 months vs <26 mg/m² : 6.4, P = .13), by cumulative cyclophosphamide dose (≥7000 mg: 9.2 vs <7000 mg: 7.0 months, P = .02) and by cumulative dexamethasone dose (>600 mg: 7.8 vs ≤600 mg: 8.3 months, P = .665). Median OS was 46.9 months. The incidence rate of AE was as follows: any grade (76.8%), ≥G3 (27.1%), ≥G3 haematological AEs (7.9%), any grade infections (31.1%) and ≥G3 infections (11.9%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated a good ORR achieved from fixed duration VCD, which was reasonably well tolerated. This was followed by modest median EFS. We envisage that the latter may be improved in this patient group with the use of a higher cumulative bortezomib dose (≥26 mg/m² ) which showed a trend for improved EFS although without statistical significance (P = .13), and with the use of a higher cumulative cyclophosphamide doses (≥7000 mg, P = .02), subject to tolerability and close monitoring.

Improved survival in multiple Myeloma patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation is entirely in the standard cytogenetic risk groups

INTRODUCTION

Novel drugs and drug combinations have improved outcomes for multiple myeloma patients. However, subgroups of patients still have a poor progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). In an attempt to identify how the novel drugs affect the outcome in standard-risk and high-risk patients, respectively, we have investigated 715 multiple myeloma (MM) patients who have undergone high dose treatment followed by autologous stem cell transplantation at our center during 1995 - 2020. Outcomes during three time periods, 1995-1999 (period I), 2000-2009 (period II), and 2010-2020 (period III), were compared separately for standard-risk and high-risk patients. Risk stratification was based on chromosome analysis for periods II and III.

RESULTS

The whole cohort of patients showed significantly improved OS with time during the three periods being at a median of 5.8, 7.0, and 10.0 years, respectively. There is also a weak tendency for improved PFS, that is, a median of 2.4, 2.6, and 2.9 years, respectively, during the same periods. However, the separate analysis of standard-risk and high-risk patients showed that the overall improvement with time was due to improved standard-risk patients (median OS 8.4 years for the period I and not reached for period II and III). In contrast, no significant improvement was seen in high-risk patients. For patients with del17p, PFS was even worse during period III as compared to period II (median 1.6 vs 3.2 years respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that the dramatic improvement in outcome for MM patients during the last 20 years only applies for standard-risk patients, while high-risk MM patients still are doing poorly, indicating that the novel drugs developed during this time are preferentially effective in standard-risk patients. New treatment modalities like CAR-T cells, CAR-NK cells, and/or bispecific antibodies should be tried in clinical studies early in the course of the disease, especially in patients with high-risk cytogenetics.