Combination of bendamustine, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (BLD) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma is feasible and highly effective: results of phase 1/2 open-label, dose escalation study

Efficacy of Bendamustine, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone (BPD) Regimen in Relapsed/Refractory Extramedullary Myeloma: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study, Real-Life Experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Relapsed/refractory extramedullary myeloma (RREMM) is an uncommon and aggressive subtype of multiple myeloma defined by plasma cell proliferation outside the bone marrow. Therapeutic options for RREMM are limited, and the prognosis is generally unfavorable. This research aimed to assess the effectiveness of the bendamustine, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (BPD) regimen in patients with RREMM.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective investigation of 11 RREMM patients who underwent BPD treatment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival. The secondary endpoints of the study were two-year survival and overall response rate (ORR). We analyzed the sociodemographic and clinical features of the patients.

RESULTS

The average age of the patients was 62 years. They had a median of four prior treatment lines, and eight patients had previously received autologous stem-cell transplantation. After eight BPD treatment cycles, the ORR stood at 54%, with one very good partial response (VGPR), five partial responses (PR), three progressive diseases (PD), and two stable diseases (SD). The median follow-up was 15 months, with a two-year PFS rate of 71.3% and a two-year survival rate of 81.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The BPD regimen demonstrated promising effectiveness in RREMM patients, yielding favorable ORR and survival rates. To corroborate these findings and explore additional treatment alternatives for this patient group, larger prospective studies are required.

Revisiting the Role of Alkylating Agents in Multiple Myeloma: Up-to-Date Evidence and Future Perspectives

From the 1960s to the early 2000s, alkylating agents (e.g., melphalan, cyclophosphamide, and bendamustine) remained a key component of standard therapy for newly-diagnosed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Later on, their associated toxicities (including second primary malignancies) and the unprecedented efficacy of novel therapies have led clinicians to increasingly consider alkylator-free approaches. Meanwhile, new alkylating agents (e.g., melflufen) and new applications of old alkylators (e.g., lymphodepletion before chimeric antigen receptor T-cell [CAR-T] therapy) have emerged in recent years. Given the expanding use of antigen-directed modalities (e.g., monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibodies, and CAR-T therapy), this review explores the current and future role of alkylating agents in different treatment settings (e.g., induction, consolidation, stem cell mobilization, pre-transplant conditioning, salvage, bridging, and lymphodepleting chemotherapy) to ellucidate the role of alkylator-based regimens in modern-day MM management.

Management of Relapsed-Refractory Multiple Myeloma in the Era of Advanced Therapies: Evidence-Based Recommendations for Routine Clinical Practice

Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematologic malignancy in adults worldwide. Over the past few years, major therapeutic advances have improved progression-free and overall survival, as well as quality of life. Despite this recent progress, MM remains incurable in the vast majority of cases. Patients eventually relapse and become refractory to multiple drug classes, making long-term management challenging. In this review, we will focus on the treatment paradigm of relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) in the era of advanced therapies emphasizing the available novel modalities that have recently been incorporated into routine practice, such as chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, bispecific antibodies, and other promising approaches. We will also discuss major factors that influence the selection of appropriate drug combinations or cellular therapies, such as relapse characteristics, and other disease and patient related parameters. Our goal is to provide insight into the currently available and experimental therapies for RRMM in an effort to guide the therapeutic decision-making process.

Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Review of Available Therapies and Clinical Scenarios Encountered in Myeloma Relapse

Multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease with the usual disease course requiring induction therapy, autologous stem cell transplantation for eligible patients, and long-term maintenance. Risk stratification tools and cytogenetic alterations help inform individualized therapeutic choices for patients in hopes of achieving long-term remissions with preserved quality of life. Unfortunately, relapses occur at different stages of the course of the disease owing to the biological heterogeneity of the disease. Addressing relapse can be complex and challenging as there are both therapy- and patient-related factors to consider. In this broad scoping review of available therapies in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), we cover the pharmacologic mechanisms underlying active therapies such as immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PIs), monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), traditional chemotherapy, and Venetoclax. We then review the clinical data supporting the use of these therapies, organized based on drug resistance/refractoriness, and the role of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Approaches to special situations during relapse such as renal impairment and extramedullary disease are also covered. Lastly, we look towards the future by briefly reviewing the clinical data supporting the use of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR-T) therapy, bispecific T cell engagers (BITE), and Cereblon E3 Ligase Modulators (CELMoDs).

Bendamustine in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: A phase II trial

Treatment of patients with resistant/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) is an unmet need. In this phase II study, we evaluated the role of bendamustine, pomalidomide and dexamethasone combination in this setting. Between February 2020 and December 2021, 28 patients were recruited. Patients received bendamustine 120 mg/m² day 1, pomalidomide 3 mg days 1-21, and dexamethasone 40 mg days 1, 8, 11, 22, regimen given for a maximum of six cycles. The median (range) age of the patients was 54 (30-76) years and 15 (53.6%) were males. Patients had received a median (range) of three (two-six) prior lines and 85.7% were refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib. The primary end-point was the overall response rate (ORR) defined as ≥partial response after at least three cycles. Secondary objectives were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression and overall survival (OS). An intent-to-treat analysis was done. An ORR of 57.6% was achieved. Patients with extramedullary myeloma had a better response rate. At a median follow-up of 8.6 months, the median PFS and OS were 6.2 and 9.7 months respectively. Toxicity was manageable; mainly haematological (neutropenia, 46.4%; anaemia, 42.8%; and thrombocytopenia, 7.1%). Bendamustine, pomalidomide and dexamethasone could be a novel combination for the heavily pretreated, lenalidomide-refractory myeloma population.

Adding bendamustine to melphalan before ASCT improves CR rate in myeloma vs. melphalan alone: A randomized phase-2 trial

Definite cure remains exceptional in myeloma patients even after high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) with melphalan (Mel) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Thus, improving efficacy of HDCT in MM remains an unresolved issue. This randomized phase II trial compared standard 200 mg/m² Mel HDCT to experimental HDCT with 200 mg/m² bendamustine, given both at days −4 and −3, combined with 100 mg/m² melphalan at days −2 and −1 (BenMel) before ASCT as first-line consolidation in myeloma patients. The primary endpoint aimed to identify at least a 15% improvement in the complete remission rate (stringent CR + CR) after HDCT with BenMel compared with Mel alone. A total of 120 MM patients were 1:1 randomized. The rate of sCR/CR after ASCT was higher in BenMel than in Mel treated patients (70.0% vs. 51.7%; p = 0.039). Three patients in the BenMel group (5.0%) had reversible acute renal insufficiency compared with none in Mel patients. Minimal residual disease negativity (<10-5) by flow cytometry was observed in 26 (45.6%) BenMel patients and 22 (37.9%) in the Mel group (p = 0.375). Our data suggest that BenMel HDCT is safe and improves the sCR/CR rate compared with standard Mel alone.

Bendamustine-Based Regimens as Salvage Therapy in Refractory/Relapsed Multiple Myeloma Patients: A Retrospective Real-Life Analysis by the Polish Myeloma Group

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable disease and patients become refractory to the treatment in the course of the disease. Bendamustine-based regimens containing steroids and other agents are among the therapeutic options offered to MM patients. Here, we investigated the safety and the efficacy of bendamustine used in patients with refractory/relapsed MM (RRMM). The patients were treated with bendamustine and steroids (n = 52) or bendamustine, steroids and immunomodulatory agents or proteasome inhibitors (n = 53). Response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and frequency of adverse events were compared between both study groups. Most efficacy measurements were better in patients treated with three-drug regimens: overall response rate (55% versus 37%, p = 0.062), median PFS (9 months versus 4 months, p < 0.001), median OS survival (18 months versus 12 months, p = 0.679). The benefit from combining bendamustine and steroids with an additional agent was found in subgroups previously treated with both lenalidmide and bortezomib, with stem cell transplant and with more than two previous therapy lines. Toxicity was similar in both study groups and bendamustine-based therapies were generally well-tolerated. Our study suggests that bendamustine may be an effective treatment for patients with RRMM. Three-drug regimens containing bendamustine, steroids and novel agents produced better outcomes and had acceptable toxicity. The efficacy of bendamustine combined with steroids was limited.

Current and Novel Alkylators in Multiple Myeloma

A large number of novel treatments for myeloma have been developed and approved; however, alkylating drugs continue to be part of standard regimens. Additionally, novel alkylators are currently being developed. We performed a non-systematized literary search for relevant papers and communications at large conferences, as well as exploiting the authors' knowledge of the field, to review the history, current use and novel concepts around the traditional alkylators cyclophosphamide, bendamustine and melphalan and current data on the newly developed pro-drug melflufen. Even in the era of targeted treatment and personalized medicine, alkylating drugs continue to be part of the standard-of-care in myeloma, and new alkylators are coming to the market.

Outcomes of VD-PACE With Immunomodulatory Agent as a Salvage Therapy for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Aggressive relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) often requires salvage cytotoxic chemotherapy. We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of VD-PACE (bortezomib, dexamethasone, cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide) with an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) in RRMM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the effectiveness and tolerability among 30 patients with RRMM receiving ≥ 1 cycle of VD-PACE + IMiD between January 2012 to April 2019.

RESULTS

Of 30 patients, 26 (86%) had myeloma double refractory to protease inhibitors and IMiDs, and had received a median of 3 lines prior of therapy. The overall response rate was 67.7%, 13% patients experienced complete remission or better, and 13% experienced very good partial response. Median progression-free and median overall survival were 11 and 26 months, respectively. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were hematologic events, which were manageable.

CONCLUSION

VD-PACE + IMiD is an effective and tolerable salvage treatment for RRMM, with an impressive response rate in pretreated RRMM.

Chemotherapy-based regimens in multiple myeloma in 2020

Multiple myeloma (MM) represents the second-most common hematologic malignancy. In the 1980s, induction therapy with alkylating agents, such as anthracyclines and steroids, as well as high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation were the main therapeutic approaches for MM. Since the introduction of more effective drugs, such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, monoclonal antibodies and histone deacetylase inhibitor, the new therapeutic algorithm allows of achieving a significantly improvement of prognosis. Numerous regimens, which differently combine these new agents, have been developed and tested in clinical trials. The results of these new regimens are reported each year. In this variegated new contest, old chemotherapeutic drugs still maintain an overriding weight, especially when beneficially combined with new drugs. Also, this is particular true in specific situations, such as extramedullary manifestations, in which tumor mass reduction becomes an urgent clinical need, or in case of chemotherapy-induced stem-cell mobilization. Moreover, melphalan represents the gold standard conditioning regimen since 2002, either alone or, possibly in the next future, in combination with busulfan. Finally, new chemotherapeutic agents with new mechanisms of action, such as melflufen, are in early experimental phase.

Treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

The therapeutic strategy for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) integrates a holistic approach regarding patient, disease, and drug-related factors. Patient-related factors include age, frailty status, and underlying comorbidities, especially cardiovascular and renal diseases and peripheral neuropathies that affect tolerability to multiple drug combinations or transplantations. Disease-related factors encompass these multiple patient-related factors, particularly the aggressiveness of the disease and cytogenetics. Regarding drug-related factors, the approval of novel proteasome inhibitors (such as carfilzomib and ixazomib), immunomodulatory agents (such as pomalidomide), monoclonal antibodies (such as daratumumab and elotuzumab), and new classes of drugs increasingly makes the choice treatment more complex and necessitates a comprehensive summary and an update of the efficacy and toxicities of each antimyeloma drug and its combinations. Further, careful monitoring of the side effects and supportive care throughout the course of treatment are important to achieve better outcomes for patients with RRMM.

Anti-VEGF Drugs in the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma Patients

The interaction between the bone marrow microenvironment and plasma cells plays an essential role in multiple myeloma progression and drug resistance. The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/VEGF receptor (VEGFR) pathway in vascular endothelial cells activates and promotes angiogenesis. Moreover, VEGF activates and promotes vasculogenesis and vasculogenic mimicry when it interacts with VEGF receptors expressed in precursor cells and inflammatory cells, respectively. In myeloma bone marrow, VEGF and VEGF receptor expression are upregulated and hyperactive in the stromal and tumor cells. It has been demonstrated that several antiangiogenic agents can effectively target VEGF-related pathways in the preclinical phase. However, they are not successful in treating multiple myeloma, probably due to the vicarious action of other cytokines and signaling pathways. Thus, the simultaneous blocking of multiple cytokine pathways, including the VEGF/VEGFR pathway, may represent a valid strategy to treat multiple myeloma. This review aims to summarize recent advances in understanding the role of the VEGF/VEGFR pathway in multiple myeloma, and mainly focuses on the transcription pathway and on strategies that target this pathway.

Bendamustine With Dexamethasone in Relapsed/Refractory Systemic Light-Chain Amyloidosis: Results of a Phase II Study

PURPOSE

No established treatments exist for relapsed/refractory systemic light-chain (AL) amyloidosis. Bendamustine has shown potential in the treatment of multiple myeloma. We conducted a phase II, multicenter trial to assess the efficacy and safety of bendamustine with dexamethasone (ben-dex) in patients with persistent or progressive AL amyloidosis after ≥ 1 prior therapy.

METHODS

The trial enrolled 31 patients who received bendamustine on days 1 and 2 (100 mg/m² intravenously) with 40 mg of weekly dexamethasone in 28-day cycles until disease progression or up to 6 cycles after complete hematologic response. The primary objective was the rate of partial hematologic response (PR) or better.

RESULTS

Patients received a median of 4 cycles (range, 2-12 cycles) with 57% of patients achieving a PR or better (11% complete response, 18% very good PR). The overall organ response was 29% among the 24 patients who had measurable organ involvement. Treatment was well tolerated with no grade 5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Sixty-five percent of patients had a therapy-related grade 3-4 AE. The most common AEs included myelosuppression, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting. The median overall survival was 18.2 months (95% CI, 11.3 to 43.8 months), and hematologic response was associated with prolonged survival (P = .0291). The median progression-free survival was 11.3 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 15.4 months).

CONCLUSION

Overall, ben-dex is a viable treatment option with substantial efficacy and limited toxicity for patients with pretreated AL amyloidosis who have limited therapeutic options. This trial was registered at (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01222260).

Venous thromboembolism risk with contemporary lenalidomide-based regimens despite thromboprophylaxis in multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Thromboprophylaxis is routinely used with lenalidomide-based regimens in multiple myeloma because of a substantial risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, little is known about the incidence of VTE with contemporary lenalidomide-based regimens. The objective of the current study was to estimate the incidence of VTE despite thromboprophylaxis with currently used lenalidomide-based regimens in patients with myeloma.

METHODS

The Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were queried from study inception to January 2019 for keywords to cover the following concepts: "lenalidomide," "venous thromboembolism," and "multiple myeloma." Phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials evaluating lenalidomide-based regimens with thromboprophylaxis were included. The pooled incidence rate of VTE was estimated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The search generated 1372 citations, with 51 clinical trials and 9069 patients included for analysis. The most common thromboprophylaxis agents were aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin, administered either per risk-stratification or at investigators' discretion. The pooled incidence of VTE in trials of patients who had newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory myeloma was 6.2% (95% CI, 5.4%-7.1%) over median treatment durations ranging from 2 to 34 cycles, which translated into 1.2 VTE events per 100 patient-cycles (95% CI, 0.9-1.7 VTE events per 100 patient-cycles). Among contemporary regimens, the risk of VTE was low with combined lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.6] events/100 patient-cycles) and lenalidomide maintenance (0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.7] events per 100 patient-cycles). VTE risk was higher with combined lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone plus proteasome inhibitors (1.3 [95% CI, 0.7-2.3] events per 100 patient-cycles).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite adequate thromboprophylaxis, lenalidomide-based regimens have a substantial risk of VTE in controlled clinical trial settings. Further studies are needed on new thromboprophylaxis strategies with regimens that have a high VTE risk.

How I treat a refractory myeloma patient who is not eligible for a clinical trial

Myeloma patients not eligible for clinical trials have many treatment options. Choosing the next best therapy starts with careful assessment of the biology and dynamics of the disease at relapse, as well as the condition and situation of the patient. Fit patients should be considered for triplet regimens, whereas intermediate and frail patients warrant dose-reduced triplets or doublets. An indolent serologic relapse may be treated with dose intensification, especially in a maintenance situation, whereas a rapid relapse requires a more aggressive approach with drug class change or a second-generation immunomodulatory drug (IMID) or proteasome inhibitor (PI). Monoclonal antibodies, in combination with PIs and IMIDs, have proven highly efficacious in early and late relapse. Key elements of supportive care include infection prevention, bone health, thromboprophylaxis, and management of active symptoms, such as pain and distress.

Phase I/II trial of bendamustine, ixazomib, and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

In this phase I/II trial, BID, bendamustine (70, 80, or 90 mg/m²), ixazomib (4 mg), and dexamethasone (40 mg), was administered to 28 patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) exposed to bortezomib and lenalidomide and refractory to at least one. A 3 + 3 dose escalation based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) was employed in phase I (total 15); 2/6 patients developed DLTs (neutropenia and thrombocytopenia) at dose level 3 establishing the recommended phase II dose as bendamustine 80 mg/m², ixazomib 4 mg, and dexamethasone 40 mg. The median age was 67 years (range, 42–72), and 43% were females. Patients received a median of 4 (range, 4–9) prior lines of therapy, of which ~50% were double refractory. In phase II, total 19 patients were treated. With a median follow-up of 17 months, 11% achieved very good partial response, 50% achieved partial response, and 27% achieved stable disease. Median progression free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival were 5.2 months (95% CI, 1.96–8.3) and 23.2 months (95% CI 16.3–30.07). The most frequent adverse events were anemia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, nausea, diarrhea, and infections. Peripheral neuropathy was infrequent. BID is a well-tolerated and effective combination therapy for patients with RRMM.

High-dose bendamustine and melphalan conditioning for autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with multiple myeloma

High-dose melphalan (MEL200) followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains a standard of care for multiple myeloma (MM). Bendamustine induces responses in MM resistant to other alkylators. Our prior Phase I trial adding bendamustine to MEL200 transplant conditioning resulted in no additional toxicity. We now report a single-arm, phase II study that evaluated the efficacy of bendamustine 225 mg/m² with MEL200 conditioning for ASCT in 18 patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) and 17 with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM). The primary end point was the complete response (CR/sCR) rate at day+ 100. Sample size was determined according to Simon's two-stage design. At stage 1, sixteen patients entered the study. As there were eight patients with CR/sCR, enrollment increased to 28 patients. Sixteen out of the first 28 evaluable patients achieved CR/sCR, meeting the design criteria. Enrollment was then expanded to a total of 35 patients. 51% achieved a CR/sCR. After a median follow-up of 65 months, 21 patients progressed, including 7 deaths. The median PFS for NDMM and RRMM was 48 and 45 months, respectively. Bendamustine/MEL200 conditioning resulted in excellent overall and depth of response as well as PFS, particularly in the RRMM patients, and is worthy of further investigation (NCT00916058).

Therapy for relapsed multiple myeloma

Despite significant progress in our understanding and the development of novel therapies, most patients with multiple myeloma will experience relapse of their disease. Therapy of relapsed myeloma has improved due to the availability of novel agents that are highly active against the disease. However, the selection of therapy can be challenging due to the emergence of toxicities, comorbidities and frailty. In the following we discuss our approach to the treatment of the patient with relapsed myeloma.

A Phase I/II Study of Evofosfamide, A Hypoxia-activated Prodrug with or without Bortezomib in Subjects with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

PURPOSE

The presence of hypoxia in the diseased bone marrow presents a new therapeutic target for multiple myeloma. Evofosfamide (formerly TH-302) is a 2-nitroimidazole prodrug of the DNA alkylator, bromo-isophosphoramide mustard, which is selectively activated under hypoxia. This trial was designed as a phase I/II study investigating evofosfamide in combination with dexamethasone, and in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-nine patients initiated therapy, 31 received the combination of evofosfamide and dexamethasone, and 28 received the combination of evofosfamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median number of prior therapies of 7 (range: 2-15). All had previously received bortezomib and immunomodulators. The MTD, treatment toxicity, and efficacy were determined.

RESULTS

The MTD was established at 340 mg/m² evofosfamide + dexamethasone with dose-limiting mucositis at higher doses. For the combination of evofosfamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone, no patient had a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and the recommended phase II dose was established at 340 mg/m². The most common ≥grade 3 adverse events (AE) were thrombocytopenia (25 patients), anemia (24 patients), neutropenia (15 patients), and leukopenia (9 patients). Skin toxicity was reported in 42 (71%) patients. Responses included 1 very good partial response (VGPR), 3 partial response (PR), 2 minor response (MR), 20 stable disease (SD), and 4 progressive disease (PD) for evofosfamide + dexamethasone and 1 complete response (CR), 2 PR, 1 MR, 18 SD, and 5 PD for evofosfamide + bortezomib + dexamethasone. Disease stabilization was observed in over 80% and this was reflective of the prolonged overall survival of 11.2 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Evofosfamide can be administered at 340 mg/m² twice a week with or without bortezomib. Clinical activity has been noted in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed refractory multiple myeloma.

Dose-intensified bendamustine and melphalan (BenMel) conditioning before second autologous transplantation in myeloma patients

Consolidation in myeloma patients with high-dose melphalan chemotherapy (Mel HDCT) and autologous transplantation (ASCT) is standard of care since more than 2 decades. However, definite cure remains exceptional despite intensive treatment, and improving effectiveness of HDCT remains an unmet clinical need. Combining intensified bendamustine with melphalan may represent an option. We analyzed safety and efficacy of combining dose-intensified bendamustine (200 mg/m² on days -4/-3) with high-dose melphalan (100 mg/m² on days -2/-1) before a second (tandem) ASCT in adverse risk myeloma patients after Mel HDCT/ASCT1. Twelve patients received BenMel conditioning before ASCT2 because of high-risk cytogenetics and/or failure to achieve complete remission (CR) after Mel HDCT/ASCT1. Comparing Mel HDCT/ASCT1 and BenMel HDCT/ASCT2, we observed no differences in hematologic recovery and tolerance. Acute renal injury after BenMel conditioning occurred in 3 (25%) patients, but was reversible in all patients, and there were no treatment related deaths. Complete remission rates were increasing from 42% after Mel/ASCT1 to 75% after BenMel/ASCT2. PFS 1 year after ASCT2 was 67%, and OS was 83%. These data suggest that dose-intensified bendamustine with melphalan conditioning is safe and warrants a prospective randomized comparison to standard melphalan HDCT in myeloma patients.

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and impaired renal function: PrE1003, a PrECOG study

Renal insufficiency is common in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and can often limit choice of therapy. Lenalidomide, a critical agent in the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma, is renally cleared., This phase I/II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide with dexamethasone in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and renal insufficiency. Three groups were treated, with creatinine clearance 30–60 cc/hr (group A), CrCl < 30 not on dialysis (group B), and patients on dialysis (group C) at escalating doses of lenalidomide. A total of 63 patients were treated and no DLTs were observed in phase I. All three groups were able to escalate to full dose lenalidomide 25 mg daily 21/28 days, although due to reduced accrual the phase II component was not entirely completed for groups B and C. Adverse events were as expected, including anemia, diarrhea and fatigue. Ten patients experienced grade 3–4 pneumonia. Overall response rate was 54% across all groups. PFS was 7.5 months and OS was 19.7 months. Lenalidomide can be given at full dose 25 mg daily 21/28 in patients with a CrCl > 30, and can be given daily to those with CrCl < 30, even when on dialysis, at doses of at least 15 mg daily.

Update on the role of lenalidomide in patients with multiple myeloma

Lenalidomide is a derivative of thalidomide and belongs to the class of drugs known as the immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs). The IMiDs have played a large role in improving the survival outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma. In particular, lenalidomide is currently standard of care in the newly diagnosed setting, in the maintenance setting post-autologous stem cell transplant, as well as in the relapsed/refractory setting. While the combination of lenalidomide and various proteasome inhibitors has proven particularly effective, there are emerging data demonstrating the effectiveness of lenalidomide in combination with other important classes of drugs including the monoclonal antibodies. Recent studies have provided insight into the molecular target of lenalidomide and the other IMiDs, although there is still much to be learned regarding the mechanisms by which lenalidomide affects the myeloma cell and the immune system. Here we review the molecular mechanisms of action, side effects, and the results of the clinical trials which have led to the widespread incorporation of lenalidomide into the myeloma therapeutic armamentarium.

Bendamustine-PAMAM Conjugates for Improved Apoptosis, Efficacy, and in Vivo Pharmacokinetics: A Sustainable Delivery Tactic

Successful delivery of a chemotherapeutic agent like bendamustine still remains a challenge in clinical conditions like chronic lymphatic leukemia (CLL), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and multiple myeloma. We have conjugated bendamustine to polyamidoamine (PAMAM) dendrimers after conjugating with N-(hydroxyethyl)maleimide (spacer) via an ester bond. The particle size of PAMAM-bendamustine conjugate was 49.8 ± 2.5 nm. In vitro drug release resulted in sustained release with improved solution stability of drug up to 72 h. In a 24 h cytotoxicity study by MTT assay against human monoblastic leukemia cells (THP-1), the IC50 value for PAMAM-bendamustine was 32.1 ± 4.8 μM compared to 50.42 ± 3.4 μM and 2303 ± 106.5 μM for bendamustine and PAMAM dendrimer, respectively. Significantly higher cell uptake and apoptosis were observed in THP-1 cells by PAMAM-bendamustine conjugate which was confirmed by flow cytometry and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Preliminary in vivo studies undertaken included pharmacokinetics studies, organ distribution studies, and tumor inhibition studies. In healthy Wistar rat model (1CBM IV push model), the pharmacokinetic studies revealed that bioavailability and t_1/2 increased significantly, i.e., almost 8.5-fold (193.8 ± 1.116 vs 22.8 ± 0.158 μg mL^-1/h) and 5.1-fold (0.75 ± 0.005 vs 3.85 ± 0.015 h), respectively, for PAMAM-bendamustine conjugate compared to pure bendamustine ( p < 0.05), however, clearance and volume of distribution were found to be decreased compared to those of free drug. The study suggests that PAMAM-bendamustine conjugate was not only stable for the longer period but also least toxic and highly taken up by THP-1 cells to exert an anticancer effect at the reduced dose. Tumor inhibition and biodistribution studies in tumor-bearing BALB/c mice revealed that PAMAM-bendamustine conjugate was more effective than the pure drug and showed higher accumulation in the tumor.

Lenalidomide in combination with bendamustine and prednisolone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: results of a phase 2 clinical trial (OSHO-#077)

INTRODUCTION

While lenalidomide monotherapy is established for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) treatment, combination therapies including lenalidomide are still under investigation in a number of phase 2/3 studies. In the current study, a treatment regime of lenalidomide (Revlimid^®), bendamustine and prednisolone (RBP) was tested in patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

METHODS

In the previously completed phase 1 study RBP with a dose of 75 mg/m² bendamustine days 1-2, prednisolone 100 mg days 1-4 and 25 mg lenalidomide days 1-21 was well tolerated.

RESULTS

Between July 2011 and September 2013, 25 patients were included in this analysis. The median number of previous treatments was 1 (range 1-2). Twenty-two patients (88%) responded after at least two cycles of RBP (one sCR, five nCR, eight VGPR and eight PR). The median time to first haematological response was 28 days, and median time to best response was 56 days. Due to increased haematological toxicity a dose reduction in most patients required in subsequent cycles of therapy. The median progression-free and overall survival was 22 and 38 months, respectively. In conclusion RBP is a highly effective therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory MM. In contrast to our phase 1 study, dose reduction was necessary in many patients because of haematological toxicity.

Use of carfilzomib in second-line therapy and beyond for relapsed multiple myeloma

The development of proteasome inhibitors has been a major advance in therapy of multiple myeloma, accounting, in part, for the significant increase in the survival of patients diagnosed with this disease. Bortezomib was the first proteasome inhibitor to be approved for the therapy of multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib is a second-generation proteasome inhibitor with irreversible binding to proteasome and less off-target toxicity. The drug has been approved for use in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. In this article, we review the use of carfilzomib as second-line therapy in multiple myeloma. We also review the current standards of care for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, with particular focus on the use of carfilzomib in advanced disease.

Emerging combination therapies for the management of multiple myeloma: the role of elotuzumab

Treatment options for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have increased during the past decade. Despite the significant advances, challenges remain on which combination strategies will provide the optimal response for any given patient. Defining optimal combination strategies and corresponding companion diagnostics, that will guide clinical decisions are required to target relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in order to improve disease progression, survival and quality of life for patients with MM. Elotuzumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody that targets signaling lymphocytic activation molecule F7 (SLAMF7), approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015 and the European Medicines Agency in 2016 for the treatment of MM. SLAMF7 is expressed in normal and malignant plasma cells and has lower expression on natural killer (NK) cells. Experimental evidence indicates that elotuzumab exhibits anti-myeloma activity through 1) antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, 2) enhancing NK cells cytotoxicity and 3) interfering with adhesion of MM cells to bone marrow stem cells (BMSCs). Although elotuzumab has no single agent activity in patients with RRMM who have received one to three prior therapies, the combination of elotuzumab with anti-myeloma agents, such as immunomodulatory drugs-lenalidomide, or proteasome inhibitors (PIs)-bortezomib, remarkably improved the overall response rates and progression-free survival in MM patients with only minimal incremental toxicity. In brief, the clinical data for elotuzumab indicate that targeting SLAMF7 in combination with the use of conventional therapies is feasible and effective with a tolerable safety profile for the treatment of RRMM.

Bendamustine hydrochloride in patients with B-cell malignancies who have comorbidities - is there an optimal dose?

INTRODUCTION

The majority of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) present with comorbidities. Many of them are poor candidates for intensive chemo-immunotherapy regimens, such as FCR (fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab). Still, most clinical trials aim to enroll 'fit' patients, who poorly represent the community oncology population. Areas covered: In the past decade, bendamustine hydrochloride, a cytotoxic agent with structural similarities to both alkylating agents and purine analogs, has received widespread use in therapy of NHL and CLL, and has demonstrated a relatively favorable toxicity profile. However, bendamustine has not been well studied in patients with hematologic malignancies who have comorbidities. Here we review the clinical data on use of bendamustine in older and unfit patients with NHL and CLL, and analyze whether there is an optimal dose of bendamustine in patients who have significant comorbidities, including renal dysfunction. Expert commentary: Reduced intensity regimens of bendamustine are effective in CLL patients with comorbidities and renal dysfunction. Even with the introduction of targeted therapies, bendamustine will likely continue to be an important therapeutic option in patients with comorbidities because of its tolerability, efficacy and cost.

Preclinical anti-myeloma activity of EDO-S101, a new bendamustine-derived molecule with added HDACi activity, through potent DNA damage induction and impairment of DNA repair

Background

Despite recent advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), the prognosis of most patients remains poor, and resistance to traditional and new drugs frequently occurs. EDO-S101 is a novel therapeutic agent conceived as the fusion of a histone deacetylase inhibitor radical to bendamustine, with the aim of potentiating its alkylating activity.

Methods

The efficacy of EDO-S101 was evaluated in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo, alone, and in combination with standard anti-myeloma agents. The underlying mechanisms of action were also evaluated on MM cell lines, patient samples, and different murine models.

Results

EDO-S101 displayed potent activity in vitro in MM cell lines (IC₅₀ 1.6–4.8 μM) and ex vivo in cells isolated from MM patients, which was higher than that of bendamustine and independent of the p53 status and previous melphalan resistance. This activity was confirmed in vivo, in a CB17-SCID murine plasmacytoma model and in de novo Vk*MYC mice, leading to a significant survival improvement in both models. In addition, EDO-S101 was the only drug with single-agent activity in the multidrug resistant Vk12653 murine model. Attending to its mechanism of action, the molecule showed both, a HDACi effect (demonstrated by α-tubulin and histone hyperacetylation) and a DNA-damaging effect (shown by an increase in γH2AX); the latter being again clearly more potent than that of bendamustine. Using a reporter plasmid integrated into the genome of some MM cell lines, we demonstrate that, apart from inducing a potent DNA damage, EDO-S101 specifically inhibited the double strand break repair by the homologous recombination pathway. Moreover, EDO-S101 treatment reduced the recruitment of repair proteins such as RAD51 to DNA-damage sites identified as γH2AX foci. Finally, EDO-S101 preclinically synergized with bortezomib, both in vitro and in vivo.

Conclusion

These findings provide rationale for the clinical investigation of EDO-S101 in MM, either as a single agent or in combination with other anti-MM drugs, particularly proteasome inhibitors.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13045-017-0495-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Therapy for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma: Guidelines From the Mayo Stratification for Myeloma and Risk-Adapted Therapy

Life expectancy in patients with multiple myeloma is increasing because of the availability of an increasing number of novel agents with various mechanisms of action against the disease. However, the disease remains incurable in most patients because of the emergence of resistant clones, leading to repeated relapses of the disease. In 2015, 5 novel agents were approved for therapy for relapsed multiple myeloma. This surfeit of novel agents renders management of relapsed multiple myeloma more complex because of the occurrence of multiple relapses, the risk of cumulative and emergent toxicity from previous therapies, as well as evolution of the disease during therapy. A group of physicians at Mayo Clinic with expertise in the care of patients with multiple myeloma regularly evaluates the evolving literature on the biology and therapy for multiple myeloma and issues guidelines on the optimal care of patients with this disease. In this article, the latest recommendations on the diagnostic evaluation of relapsed multiple myeloma and decision trees on how to treat patients at various stages of their relapse (off study) are provided together with the evidence to support them.

Immunomodulatory Drugs in Multiple Myeloma: Mechanisms of Action and Clinical Experience

Over the last two decades, the outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma, a plasma cell malignancy, have dramatically improved. The development of the immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), which include thalidomide, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide, has contributed significantly to these improved outcomes. While thalidomide is now less commonly prescribed, lenalidomide is widely used in the treatment of newly diagnosed transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients, in the maintenance setting post-transplant and in the relapsed/refractory setting, while pomalidomide is currently utilized in the relapsed/refractory setting. The IMiDs have been reported to have a multitude of activities, including anti-angiogenic, cytotoxic, and immunomodulatory. However, the more recent discoveries that the IMiDs bind to cereblon and thus regulate the ubiquitination of key transcription factors including IKZF1 and IKZF3 have provided greater insight into their mechanism of action. Here, the clinical efficacy of these agents in myeloma is reviewed and the structure-function relationship, the molecular mechanisms of action, and the association of IMiDs with second primary malignancies and thrombosis are discussed.

Bendamustine, etoposide and dexamethasone to mobilize peripheral blood hematopoietic stem cells for autologous transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma

Chemotherapeutic agents without cross-resistance to prior therapies may enhance PBSC collection and improve patient outcomes by exacting a more potent direct antitumor effect before autologous stem cell transplant. Bendamustine has broad clinical activity in transplantable lymphoid malignancies, but concern remains over the potential adverse impact of this combined alkylator-nucleoside analog on stem cell mobilization. We performed a prospective, nonrandomized phase II study including 34 patients with multiple myeloma (MM) (n=34; International Staging System (ISS) stages I (35%), II (29%) and III (24%); not scored (13%)) to evaluate bendamustine's efficacy and safety as a stem cell mobilizing agent. Patients received bendamustine (120 mg/m2 IV days 1, 2), etoposide (200 mg/m2 IV days 1-3) and dexamethasone (40 mg PO days 1- 4) (bendamustine, etoposide and dexamethasone (BED)) followed by filgrastim (10 μg/kg/day SC; through collection). All patients (100%) successfully yielded stem cells (median of 21.60 × 106/kg of body weight; range 9.24-55.5 × 106/kg), and 88% required a single apheresis. Six nonhematologic serious adverse events were observed in 6 patients including: neutropenic fever (1, grade 3), bone pain (1, grade 3) and renal insufficiency (1, grade 1). In conclusion, BED safely and effectively mobilizes hematopoietic stem cells.

Bendamustine in heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma patients: Results of a retrospective analysis from the Korean Multiple Myeloma Working Party

Background

Bendamustine may be a potential treatment option for patients with myeloma, but little is known about the utility of bendamustine as a salvage treatment, especially in Asian patients.

Methods

We performed a multicenter retrospective study of patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma who received bendamustine and prednisone.

Results

The records of 65 heavily pre-treated patients, who had undergone bortezomib and lenalidomide treatment (median number of previous treatments: 5), were analyzed. The median time from diagnosis to bendamustine treatment was 3.8 years, and the median patient age was 63 years (range, 38‒77 yr). The responses to the last treatment before bendamustine were refractory disease (N=52, 80%) or disease progression from partial response (N=13, 20%). Twenty-three patients responded to the treatment, with an overall response rate of 35% (23/65), and the median number of bendamustine treatment cycles was two (range, 1‒5 cycles). The median overall survival after bendamustine treatment was 5.5 months and the overall survival rate in responders to bendamustine was significantly better than that in non-responders (P=0.036).

Conclusion

Bendamustine may be a potential salvage treatment to extend survival in a select group of heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma.

Novel agents in the treatment of multiple myeloma: a review about the future

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a disease that affects plasma cells and can lead to devastating clinical features such as anemia, lytic bone lesions, hypercalcemia, and renal disease. An enhanced understanding of MM disease mechanisms has led to new more targeted treatments. There is now a plethora of treatments available for MM. In this review article, our aim is to discuss many of the novel agents that are being studied or have recently been approved for the treatment of MM. These agents include the following: immunomodulators (pomalidomide), proteasome inhibitors (carfilzomib, marizomib, ixazomib, oprozomib), alkylating agents (bendamustine), AKT inhibitors (afuresertib), BTK inhibitors (ibrutinib), CDK inhibitors (dinaciclib), histone deacetylase inhibitors (panobinostat, rocilinostat, vorinostat), IL-6 inhibitors (siltuximab), kinesin spindle protein inhibitors (filanesib), monoclonal antibodies (daratumumab, elotuzumab, indatuximab, SAR650984), and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors.

Evolving paradigms in the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: increased options and increased complexity

The use of modern therapies such as thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide coupled with upfront high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) has resulted in improved survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). However, patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) often have poorer clinical outcomes and might benefit from novel therapeutic strategies. Emerging therapies, such as deacetylase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies and new proteasome inhibitors, appear promising and may change the therapeutic landscape in RRMM. A limited number of studies has shown a benefit with salvage ASCT in patients with RRMM, although there remains ongoing debate about its timing and effectiveness. Improvement in transplant outcomes has re-ignited a debate on the timing and possible role for salvage ASCT and allogeneic stem cell transplant in RRMM. As the treatment options for management of patients with RRMM become increasingly complex, physicians must consider both disease- and patient-related factors in choosing the appropriate therapeutic approach, with the goal of improving efficacy while minimizing toxicity.

Treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

The approach to the patient with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) requires a careful evaluation of the results of previous treatments, the toxicities associated with them and an assessment of prognostic factors. Since the majority of patients will have received prior therapy with drug combinations including a proteasome inhibitor and/or an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), it is the physician's task to choose the right moment for the start of therapy and define with the patient which goals need to be achieved. The choice of regimen is usually based on prior responsiveness, drugs already received, prior adverse effects, the condition of the patient and expected effectiveness and tolerability. Many double and triple drug combinations are available. In addition, promising new drugs like pomalidomide, carfilzomib and monoclonal antibodies are, or will be, available shortly, while other options can be tried in clinical studies. Finally, supportive care and palliative options need to be considered in some patients. It is becoming increasingly more important to consider the therapeutic options for the whole duration of the disease rather than take a step by step approach, and to develop a systematic approach for each individual patient.

Optimal use of bendamustine in hematologic disorders: Treatment recommendations from an international consensus panel - an update

Bendamustine has achieved widespread international regulatory approval and is a standard agent for the treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Since approval, the number of indications for bendamustine has expanded to include aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma and novel targeted therapies, based on new bendamustine regimens/combinations, are being developed against CLL and lymphomas. In 2010, an international panel of bendamustine experts met and published a set of recommendations on the safe and effective use of bendamustine in patients suffering from hematologic disorders. In 2014, this panel met again to update these recommendations since the clarification of issues including optimal dosing and management of bendamustine-related toxicities. The aim of this report is to communicate the latest consensus on the use of bendamustine, permitting the expansion of its safe and effective administration, particularly in new combination therapies.

Monoclonal antibodies - A new era in the treatment of multiple myeloma

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are currently the most investigated therapeutic compounds in oncology, but there is no monoclonal antibody approved in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). Nevertheless several really promising molecules are under investigation in phase III clinical trials. Dominantly daratumumab (anti-CD38) and elotuzumab (anti-CS1) showed extraordinary effectiveness in phase I/II trials. The toxicity was acceptable which is important for their addition to standard anti-myeloma agents like proteasome inhibitors or immunomodulatory drugs. Monoclonal antibodies such as denosumab (anti-RANKL) or BHQ880 (anti-DKK-1) are investigated also in the management of myeloma bone disease. This review is focused on the most promising mAbs, their mechanisms of action and the rationale of use. Practically all available results have been described. If the ongoing trials confirm the efficacy and safety of mAbs, they would become an important part of MM treatment that would be translated in the further improvement of therapeutic outcomes.

An update in treatment options for multiple myeloma in nontransplant eligible patients

INTRODUCTION

Despite the fact that multiple myeloma (MM) is still an incurable disease, the outcome of patients who are eligible and ineligible for high-dose therapy has dramatically improved with the introduction of novel agents, that is proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs). However, this improvement is often not seen in elderly patients (above 75 years).

AREAS COVERED

This review will focus on the impact of known prognostic factors in elderly MM patients, and risk factors to identify frail elderly patients. Furthermore, data on known and novel PIs and IMiDs, as well as data on other promising novel treatment strategies, chosen based on current practice and anticipated timely approval, will be discussed. Novel treatment strategies include the use of monoclonal antibodies, such as elotuzumab, daratumumab, SAR650984 and more targeted therapies, such as histone deacetylase inhibitors, kinesin spindle protein inhibitors, and selective inhibitors of nuclear export.

EXPERT OPINION

Besides efficacy of treatment, toxicity and quality of life play an important role in treatment choice. Treatment and treatment dosing for the frail elderly as well as risk factors to identify the frail elderly require further consideration, as these patients frequently do not benefit from these novel agents due to early discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity.

Recommendations on the clinical use of bendamustine in lymphoproliferative syndromes and multiple myeloma

Bendamustine is an increasingly used hybrid alkylating agent that is active in lymphoid neoplasias via a novel mechanism of action. There are some pending questions about its use in clinical practice because of its developmental features. A consensus panel of several leading Spanish hematologists with broad experience in the clinical use of bendamustine has established recommendations for the management and treatment of hematological patients with bendamustine based on available clinical data and the experience of the participants. These recommendations address the dose and treatment regimen for different clinical indications, the management of toxicity, and support therapy. This article contains the conclusions of this consensus panel, which are intended to serve as guidelines for the use of bendamustine.

Bendamustine in multiple myeloma

The advent of high-dose melphalan with autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT), the availability of novel agents such as thalidomide, lenalidomide (immunomodulatory drugs or IMiDs) and bortezomib (proteasome inhibitor) and improvements in supportive care have allowed to increase overall survival in multiple myeloma (MM) patients; nevertheless, MM remains an incurable pathology. For this reason, newer agents are required for continued disease control. Bendamustine is an old drug rediscovered in the last decade. In fact, its unique mechanism of action with structural similarities to both alkylating agents and antimetabolities, but which is not cross-resistant to alkylating agents, has reawakened interest in the use of this drug in the treatment of MM. Studies have proven the safety and efficacy of bendamustine administered alone or in combination with new drugs in both upfront and relapse/refractory settings of MM patients, including those with renal impairment. Moreover, bendamustine has been successfully used as conditioning for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Finally, the use of bendamustine does not compromise peripheral blood stem-cell collection. This drug is generally well tolerated, with the majority of adverse events being due to myelosuppression. Non-haematological adverse events are infrequent and usually mild.

Bendamustine, thalidomide and dexamethasone combination therapy for relapsed/refractory myeloma patients: results of the MUKone randomized dose selection trial

There is a significant unmet need in effective therapy for relapsed myeloma patients once they become refractory to bortezomib and lenalidomide. While data from the front line setting suggest bendamustine is superior to melphalan, there is no information defining optimal bendamustine dose in multiply-treated patients. We report a multi-centre randomized two-stage phase 2 trial simultaneously assessing deliverability and activity of two doses of bendamustine (60 mg/m2 vs. 100 mg/m2) days 1 and 8, thalidomide (100 mg) days 1-21 and low dose dexamethasone (20 mg) days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of a 28-d cycle. Ninety-four relapsing patients were treated on trial, with a median three prior treatment lines. A pre-planned interim deliverability and activity assessment led to closure of the 100 mg/m2 arm due to excess cytopenias, and led to amendment of entry criteria for cytopenias. Non-haematological toxicities including thromboembolism and neurotoxicity were infrequent. In the 60 mg/m2 arm, treatment was deliverable in 61.1% subjects and the partial response rate was 46.3% in the study eligible population, with 7.5 months progression-free survival. This study demonstrates bendamustine at 60 mg/m2 twice per month with thalidomide and dexamethasone is deliverable for repeated cycles in heavily pre-treated myeloma patients and has substantial clinical activity.