Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a multicenter phase 1/2 open-label study

Metronomic chemotherapy in hematology: Lessons from preclinical and clinical studies to build a solid rationale for future schedules

Metronomic chemotherapy (mCHEMO), based on frequent, regular administration of low, but pharmacologically active drug doses, optimizes antitumor efficacy by targeting multiple targets and reducing toxicity of antineoplastic drugs. This minireview will summarize preclinical and clinical studies on cytotoxic drugs given at weekly, daily, or at continuous metronomic schedules alone or in combination with novel targeted agents for hematological malignancies, including lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and leukemia. Most of the preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies have reported a significant benefit of both mCHEMO monotherapy and combinatorial regimens compared with chemotherapy at the maximum tolerated dose. However, the combination of mCHEMO with targeted drugs is still little explored in the hematologic clinical setting. Data obtained from preclinical studies on low dose metronomic chemotherapy in hematological malignancies clearly suggested the possibility to clinically investigate more tolerable and effective strategies for the treatment of patients with advanced hematological malignancies, or at least for those frail and elderly patients, who are not eligible or resistant to standard treatments.

Open-labeled, multicenter phase II study of prophylactic administration of pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who received pomalidomide-based regimens (KMM170)

Introduction

Pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) has been widely used for preventing febrile neutropenia in various types of cancer treatment. In the present study, we prospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of pegfilgrastim as a primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia and infection among patients with relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treated with pomalidomide-based regimens.

Methods

Thirty-three patients with RRMM who received pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) with or without cyclophosphamide (PCd) were enrolled in this study. Twenty-eight patients were treated with PCd and 5 patients were treated with Pd. All patients were given pegfilgrastim subcutaneously with a single administration performed on the first day of each cycle as primary prophylaxis until the fourth cycle.

Results

The median age of the patients was 75 (range 56-85), and the median prior line of therapy was 2 (range 2-6). Seventeen patients (51.5%) had any grade of neutropenia and 20 (60.6%) had any grade of thrombocytopenia before starting pomalidomide treatment. During the 4 cycles of treatment, grade 3 or more neutropenia occurred in 17 patients (51.5%), and 4 (12.1%) experienced grade 3 or more febrile neutropenia. Grade 3 or more infections occurred in 5 patients (15.2%). Interestingly, the patients with markedly increased ANC of more than 2 x 109/L compared to baseline ANC after 7 days of pegfilgrastim at 1st cycle of treatment showed a significantly lower incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia. The most common adverse event of pegfilgrastim was fatigue, and all the adverse events caused by pegfilgrastim were grade 1 or 2. And there was no significant change in the immune cell population and cytokines during the administration of pegfilgrastim.

Discussion

Considering that this study included elderly patients with baseline neutropenia, pegylated G-CSF could be helpful to prevent severe neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, or infection in patients with RRMM.

Pomalidomide combinations are a safe and effective option after daratumumab failure

PURPOSE

Outcomes of multiple myeloma (MM) patients who are refractory to daratumumab are dismal and no standard of treatment exists for this patients' population. Here, we investigate the role of pomalidomide combinations in daratumumab-refractory MM patients.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of myeloma patients treated at four referral centers (three in Germany and one in Italy). Review chart identified 30 patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma, who progressed during treatment with daratumumab and were treated with pomalidomide-based combinations in the subsequent lines of therapy.

RESULTS

Responses improved from 37% with daratumumab to 53% with pomalidomide. Of seven patients with extramedullary MM (EMM), four achieved a clinical stabilization with pomalidomide, including one patient with a long-lasting complete response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 6 and 12 months, respectively. Pomalidomide combinations were well tolerated, no patient discontinued treatment due to adverse events.

CONCLUSION

These data show that pomalidomide-based combinations can be an effective and safe salvage regimen for daratumumab-refractory patients, including those with EMM.

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.

Ixazomib, Oral Metronomic Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone for First-Line Treatment of Multiple Myeloma: A Phase II Brown University Oncology Group Study

BACKGROUND

Newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients have many available treatment options. While lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) is the preferred initial treatment for many patients, several other agents may provide similar efficacy with less toxicity and improved ease of administration.

METHODS

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the all-oral regimen of ixazomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone with the use of metronomic cyclophosphamide dosing in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

RESULTS

The study was stopped prior to planned enrollment due to slow recruitment, with 12 patients available for final analysis. The overall response rate was 58.3% with 2 patients achieving a very good partial response (16.7%) and 5 patients achieving a partial response (41.7%). Median progression-free survival was 16 months, and median overall survival was 43 months. There were no episodes of grade 3 or greater peripheral neuropathy. Grade 3 or greater dermatologic toxicity was experienced in 50% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Although limited enrollment prevented full efficacy evaluation, our data do not support further study of metronomic cyclophosphamide in combination with ixazomib and dexamethasone in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The activity of this regimen in the relapsed/refractory setting requires further study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02412228).

Pomalidomide- and dexamethasone-based regimens in the treatment of refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma

Pomalidomide is a potent immunomodulatory agent that is currently a standard of care backbone for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) patients in the relapsed/refractory setting after exposure to lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. The present review addresses current knowledge regarding the clinical use of pomalidomide in relapsed myeloma patients. Pomalidomide has direct myeloma cell tumoricidal effects by activating proteasomal degradation of Ikaros and Aiolos transcription factors and also indirect effects by modulation of immune responses, interaction with bone marrow stromal cells, and inhibition of angiogenesis. It is approved by regulatory authorities as doublet combination with dexamethasone but four more triplets are also approved for this setting. Many ongoing trials are evaluating the pomalidomide-dexamethasone backbone with newer anti-myeloma class agents or in quadruplet combinations. Pomalidomide-dexamethasone is currently one of the powerful tools available for use in the relapsed/refractory MM setting. Insights into the synergistic immunomodulatory effects of pomalidomide and other anti-myeloma agents and the mechanisms that overcome clonal resistance will potentially allow targeted use of triplet combinations at each relapse.

Pomalidomide in Patients With Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Prospective Study Within the Nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry

Patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) generally have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Previous trials demonstrated that pomalidomide combined with low-dose dexamethasone (Pd) is effective in these patients with significant responses and improved progression-free survival (PFS). Pd has been approved in RRMM patients who received ≥2 prior lines of therapy. Here, we present the results of a population-based study of patients with RRMM treated with Pd in The Netherlands from time of pomalidomide approval. Using the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry, data from all nontrial patients with RRMM treated with Pd were collected. Data were analyzed of response, PFS, and overall survival (OS). A total of 237 patients were included in this analysis. Previous treatment consisted of a proteasome inhibitor in 227 patients (96%) and/or an immune-modulating agent in 235 patients (99%). One hundred forty patients (59%) were refractory to an immune-modulating agent in their last line of therapy. Median time from diagnosis to treatment with Pd was 4.9 years (interquartile range, 2.7–7.9), and the median number of prior treatments was 4 (interquartile range, 3–5). Median PFS and OS for all patients were 3.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1–3.8) and 7.7 months (95% CI, 5.7–9.7), respectively. For patients achieving ≥PR, median PFS and OS were 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.3–12.9) and 16.3 months (95% CI, 13.6–23.2), respectively. This nationwide, population-based registry study confirms data shown in pivotal clinical trials on Pd. PFS in this analysis is comparable to PFS observed in those clinical trials.

How I Treat Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Despite recent advances multiple myeloma remains an incurable disease for most of the patients and initial remission will be followed by relapses requiring therapy. For many, there will be several remissions and relapses until resistance develops to all available therapies. With the introduction of several new agents, myeloma treatment has changed drastically and there are new options for the management of relapsed or refractory disease, including new drug classes with distinct mechanisms of action and cellular therapies. However, resistance to major drug classes used in first line remain the most critical factor for the choice of treatment at relapse. Continuous lenalidomide-based therapy is used extensively at first line and resistance to lenalidomide has become the key factor for the choice of salvage therapy. Daratumumab is increasingly used in first line and soon patients that relapse while on daratumumab will become a common challenge. Three-drug regimens are standard approach to manage relapsed disease. Adding drugs with new mechanisms of activity can improves outcomes and overcomes class resistance but, until now, while the biology is important, can offer only limited guidance for the choice of therapy.

Metronomic chemotherapy regimens and targeted therapies in non-Hodgkin lymphoma: The best of two worlds

Novel drugs are rapidly moving forward the treatment-paradigm of non-Hodgkin-lymphomas (NHLs). Notwithstanding, especially in aggressive subtypes, chemotherapy remains the pillar of treatment. Indeed, the combination of highly effective Maximum-Tolerated-Dose Chemotherapy (MTD-CHEMO) + "novel drugs", has so far, fallen short from expectations, often because it caused excessive toxicity. Metronomic chemotherapy (mCHEMO), which is the frequent, long-term administration of low dose cytotoxic drugs, may allow more effective and tolerable combinations. mCHEMO pharmacodynamics, has been described as pleiotropic. In fact, it may have different cellular and molecular targets, when drugs or their schedules are modified. Although mCHEMO has been little explored in NHLs, pre-clinical studies - in lymphoma models - which addressed the activity of mCHEMO in combination with novel drugs, have shown very promising results. These included inhibitors of histone deacetylase, mTOR and PI3K/mTOR, as well as the immune checkpoint inhibitor anti-PD-L1. Moreover, a few impressive reports have recently shown all-oral mCHEMO schedules, with or without rituximab, can effectively shrink both B and T-cell aggressive NHLs. Indeed, these regimens allowed elderly-frail patients to achieve sustained remission, while toxicity proved manageable. In our opinion, all-oral mCHEMO, is an active, easy-to start, well-tolerated, and inexpensive therapeutic approach, which deserves further investigation. Most importantly, mCHEMO, holds promise to empower the activity of novel targeted therapies, without causing excessive toxicity.

Rapid Progress in the Use of Immunomodulatory Drugs and Cereblon E3 Ligase Modulators in the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

Over the past two decades, the improvement in our understanding of the biology of MM and the introduction of new drug classes, including immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PI), and monoclonal antibodies (MoAb), have significantly improved outcomes. The first IMiD introduced to treat MM was thalidomide. The side effects observed during treatment with thalidomide initiated work on the synthesis of IMiD analogs. Subsequently, lenalidomide and pomalidomide were developed, both with different safety profiles, and they have better tolerability than thalidomide. In 2010, the cereblon (CRBN) protein was discovered as a direct target of IMiDs. By binding to CRBN, IMiDs change the substrate specificity of the CRBN E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, which results in the breakdown of internal Ikaros and Aiolos proteins. Most clinical trials conducted, both in newly diagnosed, post-transplant maintenance and relapsed/refractory MM, report a beneficial effect of IMiDs on the extension of progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with MM. Due to side effects, thalidomide is used less frequently. Currently, lenalidomide is used at every phase of MM treatment. Lenalidomide is used in conjunction with other agents such as PIs and MoAb as induction and relapsed therapy. Pomalidomide is currently used to treat relapsed/refractory MM, also with PIs and monoclonal antibodies. Current clinical trials are evaluating the efficacy of IMiD derivatives, the CRBN E3 ligase modulators (CELMoDs). This review focuses on the impact of IMiDs for the treatment of MM.

Is more better? An analysis of toxicity and response outcomes from dose-finding clinical trials in cancer

BACKGROUND

The overwhelming majority of dose-escalation clinical trials use methods that seek a maximum tolerable dose, including rule-based methods like the 3+3, and model-based methods like CRM and EWOC. These methods assume that the incidences of efficacy and toxicity always increase as dose is increased. This assumption is widely accepted with cytotoxic therapies. In recent decades, however, the search for novel cancer treatments has broadened, increasingly focusing on inhibitors and antibodies. The rationale that higher doses are always associated with superior efficacy is less clear for these types of therapies.

METHODS

We extracted dose-level efficacy and toxicity outcomes from 115 manuscripts reporting dose-finding clinical trials in cancer between 2008 and 2014. We analysed the outcomes from each manuscript using flexible non-linear regression models to investigate the evidence supporting the monotonic efficacy and toxicity assumptions.

RESULTS

We found that the monotonic toxicity assumption was well-supported across most treatment classes and disease areas. In contrast, we found very little evidence supporting the monotonic efficacy assumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Our conclusion is that dose-escalation trials routinely use methods whose assumptions are violated by the outcomes observed. As a consequence, dose-finding trials risk recommending unjustifiably high doses that may be harmful to patients. We recommend that trialists consider experimental designs that allow toxicity and efficacy outcomes to jointly determine the doses given to patients and recommended for further study.

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.

Sequencing multiple myeloma therapies with and after antibody therapies

In multiple myeloma (MM), treatment selection and sequencing become increasingly complex with the increasing number of therapeutic options, including antibodies. Choice of treatment is dependent on various factors including patient- and tumor-related features. In addition, treatment-related factors, such as type and response to prior therapy, are also critical in terms of the selection of a new treatment regimen. Furthermore, approval status and reimbursement policies influence treatment choice. At the time of first relapse, patients who received a bortezomib-based regimen can switch to lenalidomide-based treatment, whereas patients who received lenalidomide until progression can switch to a proteasome inhibitor-based therapy. Alternatively, there is increasing evidence that pomalidomide-based triplets are also effective following the development of lenalidomide-refractory disease both in early and later relapse settings. Patients who become refractory to immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, and CD38 antibodies have a poor prognosis. These triple-class refractory patients may benefit from novel, recently approved agents such as XPO1 inhibitors or from participation in a clinical trial. Furthermore, retreatment with agents that were received in previous lines of therapy can also be considered in heavily pretreated patients, for example, in combination with classic cytotoxic drugs. Importantly, with the increasing use of CD38 antibodies in newly diagnosed and early relapsed/refractory MM, more information is needed on the potential value of retreatment with CD38 antibodies. With the introduction of new immunotherapies with novel modes of action, we also need a better understanding of sequencing of immunotherapeutic agents by taking into account the effect of prior therapy on immune function.

Impact of last lenalidomide dose, duration, and IMiD-free interval in patients with myeloma treated with pomalidomide/dexamethasone

To gain insights into the characteristics of clinical resistance to lenalidomide, we evaluated the outcomes of 147 consecutive patients with multiple myeloma (MM) homogeneously treated with immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiDs) pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) for relapsed and/or refractory MM (median, 3 prior lines of treatment). We focused our analysis on the effect of the lenalidomide dose at which resistance was developed, the duration of lenalidomide exposure, and lenalidomide-free interval. On intent to treat, 33% of patients achieved ≥partial remission (PR) with Pd. When Pd was given immediately after lenalidomide, ≥PR was 32% (vs 37% after bortezomib). The response rates were similar for patients that received 5 to 15 mg vs 25 mg of lenalidomide (38.5% vs 30.5%, P = .329). Response rates were higher for patients that had received at least 12 months of lenalidomide (44% vs 27%) and for those with ≥18 months from last lenalidomide dose to pomalidomide dose (65% vs 23%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 5 and 12.1 months, respectively, which was similar for patients who received lenalidomide, bortezomib or other regimens just before Pd and similar for patients who were receiving different doses of lenalidomide. IMiD-free interval ≥18 months was associated with longer PFS (10.3 vs 3.9 months, P = .003) and OS (27.1 vs 9.3, P = .008) as well as duration of last lenalidomide therapy ≥12 months (PFS: 7.8 vs 3.2, P = .023; OS: 16.5 vs 7.9, P = .005) even after adjustment for the number of prior therapies, duration of disease, and last lenalidomide dose.

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.

Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone for elderly patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: A study of the Korean Multiple Myeloma Working Party (KMMWP-164 study)

Patients with transplant‐ineligible relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have a short life expectancy, especially when they have failed both the proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulator therapies. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (PCd) in elderly patients with RRMM. This phase 2 clinical trial recruited 55 elderly patients with RRMM. The patients underwent a 28‐day treatment cycle: pomalidomide (4 mg/day on days 1‐21, administered orally) and cyclophosphamide (400 mg/day on days 1, 8, and 15; administered orally) plus dexamethasone. The median (range) age of the patients was 73.3 (64‐86) years, and 8 (14.5%) patients who were ≥ 80 years old. Eight (14.5%) and 31 (56.4%) patients exhibited stage III (revised international staging system) and frail status (simplified frailty scale), respectively. The overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) of PCd therapy were 58.2% and 72.7%, respectively. The median PFS and median overall survival (OS) were 6.90 months (95% CI, 4.7‐9.0) and 18.48 months (95% CI, 9.4‐27.6), respectively. The incidence rate of grade ≥ 3 non‐hematological toxicities was 70.8%. In particular, the incidence rate of primary infection was 45.4%, including 21.8% for pneumonia, 9.0% for sepsis, and 14.6% for febrile neutropenia. In conclusion, PCd is an effective regimen for elderly patients with RRMM who had failed both bortezomib and lenalidomide treatments, but in whom the treatment‐associated infection is the main cause of morbidity and mortality.

Immunomodulatory drugs in the treatment of multiple myeloma

The prognosis of multiple myeloma was quite poor in the last century, but it has significantly improved with the incorporation of novel agents, immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors. Thalidomide was first developed as a sedative in 1950s, but it was withdrawn from the market because of teratogenicity. In 1990s, however, thalidomide received attention due to the discovery of its anticancer potential derived from antiangiogenic and immunomodulatory activities, and its therapeutic effect on myeloma. In 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the use of thalidomide under strict control for the treatment of multiple myeloma. After that, two new IMiDs, lenalidomide and pomalidomide, were developed for the sake of more antitumor activity and less adverse events than thalidomide. The molecular mechanism of action of IMiDs remained unclear for a long time until 2010 when the protein cereblon (CRBN) was identified as a primary direct target. IMiDs binds to CRBN and alters the substrate specificity of the CRBN E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, resulting in breakdown of intrinsic downstream proteins such as IKZF1 (Ikaros) and IKZF3 (Aiolos). There are many clinical trials of multiple myeloma using IMiDs under various conditions, and most of them show the efficacy of IMiDs. Nowadays lenalidomide plays a central role in both newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory settings, mainly in combination with other novel agents such as proteasome inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies. This review presents an overview of recent advances in immunomodulatory drugs in the treatment of multiple myeloma.

Successful treatment with pomalidomide and intrathecal injections for central nervous system plasmacytoma in a patient under haemodialysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVES

The involvement of the central nervous system (CNS) in multiple myeloma (MM) is uncommon and has an extremely poor prognosis, and optimal treatment strategies for the CNS MM patients have not yet been established.

CASE SUMMARY

A 71-year-old MM patient with severe renal impairment exhibited extramedullary relapse in the CNS and progression while being treated with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. However, she achieved very good partial remission after a treatment with pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (PCD) in combination with intrathecal chemotherapy.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

This is the first case report to describe MM with CNS involvement in a patient who had responded to PCD under haemodialysis. The combined intrathecal administration of cytotoxic agents and PCD may prolong survival and is tolerated well by patients with severe renal impairment.

Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients in a real-life setting: a single-center retrospective study

Pomalidomide dexamethasone is a standard of care for relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) patients who received at least two prior lines of therapy, including both lenalidomide and proteasome inhibitors (PI). We report here a real-life single-center series of 49 consecutive patients with relapsed and refractory MM treated with the triplet pomalidomide cyclophosphamide dexamethasone (PCD) combination. The median of prior lines of therapy was 3 and all patients were previously exposed to proteasome inhibitors and lenalidomide. The overall response rate was 76%, including 27% very good partial response or better. With a median follow-up of 16 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.3 months and the median overall survival was not reached. Regarding safety, most frequent toxicity was hematologic, including 37% grade 3-4 cytopenias. Nine patients (18%) discontinued therapy due to adverse event. Our study confirms that PCD combination is feasible and results in favorable response rate and PFS in comparison with pomalidomide dexamethasone alone.

Navigating the treatment landscape in multiple myeloma: which combinations to use and when?

Multiple myeloma is one of the most common hematological malignancies, affecting mainly elderly patients. The treatment landscape for the management of this disease has evolved significantly over the past 15 years, and a vast array of therapeutics is now available, including immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors, histone deacetylase inhibitors, and monoclonal antibodies. As a result, deciding which drugs to use and when, and whether these should be used in a particular order or combination, can be challenging. Although combination regimens are often associated with deeper responses and better long-term outcomes than monotherapy, and are becoming the standard of care, they may result in significant incremental toxicity; hence, a sequential approach may be more appropriate for some patients. In particular, treatment choices can vary depending on whether the patient has newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, is eligible for transplant, has relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma, or is considered to have high-risk disease. In this review, we discuss factors to be taken into account when making treatment decisions in each of these settings. We also briefly discuss possible therapeutic strategies involving agents that may become available in the future.

Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma

It is important to have an effective therapy for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) at first relapse, particularly if an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is considered at this stage. This multicenter, phase 2 trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of weekly oral pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (PCD) in patients with MM in first relapse after treatment with lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (RVD). All patients had received RVD as induction and consolidation therapy, plus lenalidomide maintenance for 1 year (arm A). Half had also received an ASCT after induction (arm B). At MM relapse, all patients received 4 oral cycles of pomalidomide 4 mg (days 1-21), cyclophosphamide 300 mg (days 1, 8, 15, and 22), and dexamethasone 40 mg (days 1-4 and days 15-18 of a 28-day cycle; PCD). Responding patients in arm A underwent ASCT and received 2 additional cycles of PCD, whereas those in arm B received 5 cycles of PCD. All patients received pomalidomide-dexamethasone maintenance until disease progression. Primary end point was partial remission or better after the initial 4 cycles of PCD. Responses were obtained in 82/97 (85%) patients evaluated: complete remission (n = 1; 1%), very good partial remission (n = 32; 33%), and partial remission (n = 49; 51%). Three patients (3%) had stable disease, and 6 (6%) had disease progression (6 response failures). Forty-five (94%) of the 48 patients in arm A underwent planned ASCT. PCD was effective therapy after first relapse with RVD. After 4 cycles, the rate of partial remission or better was 85%, and 94% of planned ASCTs were performed. Toxicity was mostly hematologic and manageable. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02244125.

Phase 2 study of all-oral ixazomib, cyclophosphamide and low-dose dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

There is a need for efficacious, convenient treatments with long-term tolerability for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). This phase 2 study evaluated the all-oral combination of ixazomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (ICd). Patients with RRMM received ixazomib 4 mg and cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m² on days 1, 8 and 15, and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Seventy-eight patients were enrolled (median age 63·5 years). At data cut-off, patients had received a median of 12 treatment cycles; 31% remained on treatment. ORR was 48% [16% very good partial response or better (≥VGPR)]. ORR was 64% and 32% in patients aged ≥65 and <65 years (25% and 16% ≥VGPR), respectively. At a median follow-up of 15·2 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14·2 months, with a trend towards better PFS in patients aged ≥65 years vs. <65 years (median 18·7 months vs. 12·0 months; hazard ratio 0·62, P = 0·14). ICd was well tolerated. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhoea (33%), nausea (24%), upper respiratory tract infection (24%), and thrombocytopenia (22%); 10 patients (13%) had peripheral neuropathy (one grade 3). This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02046070).

Immunomodulatory drugs and the risk of serious infection in multiple myeloma: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies

The effect of immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) on serious infection remains uncertain. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the possible impact of IMiDs on serious infection in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies from databases that addressed the effect of IMiDs on serious infection in patients with MM. We pooled data from RCTs and observational studies separately and used the GRADE approach to rate the quality of evidence. Rates in patients with individual IMiDs at different treatment status ranged from 7.00 to 23.00%. The use of thalidomide- or lenalidomide-based regimen induction therapy for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT)-ineligible patients suggests increase in serious infection (RR = 1.59, 95% CI 1.31-1.93, p < 0.01). Compared to conventional therapy, IMiDs' induction in ASCT-eligible patients significantly decreases the risk of serious infection (RR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.72-0.94, p < 0.01). Lenalidomide-based therapy was associated with a significant increase in risk of serious infection in patients treated compared with conventional therapy (RR = 2.45, 95% CI 1.57-3.83, p < 0.01). The current evidence suggests that patients with MM treated with IMiDs are at a high risk of serious infection.

Current and New Therapeutic Strategies for Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: An Update

Although survival of multiple myeloma patients has at least doubled during recent years, most patients eventually relapse, and treatment at this stage may be particularly complex. At the time of relapse, the use of alternative drugs to those given upfront is current practice. However, many new options are currently available for the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma, including recently approved drugs, such as the second- and third-generation proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib, the immunomodulatory agent pomalidomide, the monoclonal antibodies daratumumab and elotuzumab and the histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat, but also new targeted agents are under active investigation (e.g. signal transduction modulators, kinesin spindle protein inhibitors, and inhibitors of NF-kB, MAPK, AKT). We here describe a new paradigm for the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma. The final goal should be finding a balance among efficacy, toxicity, and cost and, at the end of the road, achieving long-lasting control of the disease and eventually even cure in a subset of patients.

Activation of NK cells and disruption of PD-L1/PD-1 axis: two different ways for lenalidomide to block myeloma progression

Natural Killer (NK) cells play a critical role against tumor cells in hematological malignancies. Their activating receptors are essential in tumor cell killing. In Multiple Myeloma (MM) patients, NK cell differentiation, activation and cytotoxic potential are strongly impaired leading to MM escape from immune surveillance in tissues and bone marrow. Mechanisms used by MM to affect NK cell functions are mediated by the release of soluble factors, the expression of activating and inhibitory NK cell ligands, and the expression of immune check-point inhibitors. Lenalidomide represents an efficient clinical approach in MM treatment to improve patients' survival. Lenalidomide does not only promotes tumor apoptosis, but also stimulates T and NK cells, thereby facilitating NK-mediated tumor recognition and killing. This occurs since Lenalidomide acts on several critical points: stimulates T cell proliferation and cytokine secretion; decreases the expression of the immune check-point inhibitor Programmed Death-1 (PD-1) on both T and NK cells in MM patients; decreases the expression of both PD-1 and PD-L1 on MM cells; promotes MM cell death and abrogates MM/stromal microenvironment cross-talk, a process known to promote the MM cell survival and proliferation. This leads to the inhibition of the negative signal induced by PD-1/PD-L1 axis on NK cells, restoring NK cell cytotoxic functions. Given the importance of an effective immune response to counteract the MM progression and the promising approaches using anti-PD-1/PD-L1 strategies, we will discuss in this review how Lenalidomide could represent an adequate approach to re-establish the recognition against MM by exhausted NK cell.

Emerging drugs and combinations to treat multiple myeloma

In the past few years, multiple targeted therapies and immunotherapies including second generation immunomodulatory drugs (pomalidomide) and proteasome inhibitors (carfilzomib, ixazomib), monoclonal antibodies and checkpoint inhibitors were approved for the treatment of myeloma or entered advanced phases of clinical testing. These agents showed significant activity in advanced myeloma and increased the available treatment strategies. Pomalidomide is well-tolerated and effective in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who have exhausted any possible treatment with lenalidomide and bortezomib. Carfilzomib, a second-generation proteasome inhibitor, is active as a single agent and in combination with other anti-myeloma agents. Ixazomib is the first oral proteasome inhibitor to be evaluated in myeloma and is associated with a good safety profile and anti-myeloma activity in relapsed/refractory patients, even in those refractory to bortezomib. Monoclonal antibodies and immune checkpoint inhibitors are likely to play a major role in the treatment of myeloma over the next decade. In phase 3 studies, triplet regimens based on these agents combined with a backbone therapy (including lenalidomide, pomalidomide or bortezomib) were more efficacious than doublet regimens in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, with limited additional toxic effects. This paper aims to provide an overview of the recent use of these agents for the treatment of myeloma, in particular focusing on the role of multi-agent combinations.

Practical Approaches to the Management of Dual Refractory Multiple Myeloma

The outcome of myeloma patients' dual refractory to lenalidomide and bortezomib is generally poor and represents a significant clinical challenge with a clear need for new therapeutic approaches. This has prompted the development of next-generation proteasome inhibitors and immunodulatory drugs (IMiDs), as well as new classes of drugs with novel mechanisms of action. As a result, several of these agents have received regulatory approval that have shown promising activity in the dual refractory setting including the second-generation proteasome inhibitor carfilzomib and third-generation IMiD pomalidomide. Moreover, the regulatory approval of several first-in-class drugs for myeloma such as the histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor panobinostat and the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody daratumumab has further broadened the therapeutic landscape for these patients. Collectively, these advances have provided new treatment strategies in dual refractory myeloma as well as important insights for the development of future studies with rationally designed drug combinations to target this challenging patient population.

Pomalidomide in the treatment of multiple myeloma: design, development and place in therapy

Multiple myeloma is a very heterogeneous disease with variable survival. Despite recent progress and the widespread use of new agents, patients with relapsed and refractory disease have a poor outcome. Immunomodulatory drugs play a key role in both the front-line and the relapsed/refractory setting. The combination of pomalidomide (POM) and dexamethasone is safe and effective in relapsed and refractory patients, even in those with high-risk cytogenetic features. Furthermore, it can be used in most patients without the need to adjust according to the degree of renal failure. In order to further improve the results, POM-based triplet therapies are currently used. This article highlights the most relevant issues of POM and POM-based combinations in the relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma setting, from a pharmacological and clinical point of view.

Effect of pomalidomide on relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In this work, we aim to further analyze the effect of pomalidomide for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted on September 20, 2016. Pooled effect size (ES) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects model. STATA software (version 12.0; Stata Corporation; College Station, TX, USA) was employed to do all statistical analyses. A total of 8 studies were included for analysis. The combined results demonstrated that the pooled proportion of overall response rate (ORR) was 0.35 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.43, P=0.000), and the pooled proportion of complete response rate (CRR) was 0.02 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.03, P=0.541). Pomalidomide was generally well tolerated by patients reported in the studies. Further studies would be required to conduct more prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with larger samples to assess the proper place of pomalidomide as single agent or combined with other agents for RRMM.

Current and developing synthetic pharmacotherapy for treating relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of novel agents has significantly improved multiple myeloma (MM) patient outcome during the last two decades. MM received the most drug approvals for any one malignancy during this time period, both in the United States as well as in Europe. Areas covered: Proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies are prototype drug classes, which target both specific MM cell functions, as well as the tumor supportive bone marrow microenvironment, and represent current cornerstones of MM therapy. Importantly, the unprecedented extent and frequency of durable responses, in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), in particular, is predominantly based on the combinatorial use of these agents with conventional chemotherapeutics or representatives of other drug classes. This article will summarize past landmark discoveries in MM that led to the dramatic progress of today's clinical practice. Moreover, developing strategies will be discussed that are likely to yet improve patient outcome even further. Expert opinion: Despite significant therapeutic advancements, MM remains an incurable disease. With several novel agents in the preclinical and early clinical pipeline, among those novel CD38 and BCMA mAbs, immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as ricolinostat, selinexor, venetoclax, CAR-T cells, and vaccines, further advances in MM patient outcome are expected in the near future.

How I treat first relapse of myeloma

The standard treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma has been either lenalidomide-dexamethasone (RD) or bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD) but it is changing rapidly for 2 reasons. First, lenalidomide and bortezomib are currently used in frontline treatment and many patients become resistant to these agents early in the course of their disease. Second, 6 second-line new agents have been recently developed and offer new possibilities (pomalidomide, carfilzomib and ixazomib, panobinostat, elotuzumab, and daratumumab). Recent randomized studies have shown that triple combinations adding 1 of these new agents (except pomalidomide) to the RD or VD regimens were superior to the double combinations in terms of response rate and progression-free survival (PFS). Their place in the treatment of first relapse is discussed here. Among these agents, daratumumab is clearly a breakthrough and daratumumab-based combinations might become the preferred option in the near future. However, all of these drugs are expensive and are not available or affordable in all countries. We propose a decision algorithm for first relapse in fit patients with the objective of achieving the best PFS. The choice of salvage regimen is based on lenalidomide/bortezomib resistance, daratumumab availability, and cost. Autologous transplantation should be considered in younger patients if not used upfront.

Immunomodulatory Agents and Proteasome Inhibitors in the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

OBJECTIVE

To review the current evidence on the use of immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM).

DATA SOURCES

Journal articles, research reports, state of the science papers, and clinical guidelines.

CONCLUSION

There has been a tremendous increase of new agents to treat multiple myeloma in the last 15 years. The IMiDs and PIs remain essential components of many anti-myeloma regimens.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

With these advances in the therapeutic landscape, knowledge of these drugs, side effects and nursing implications are essential to improve outcomes. Patient education is also of vital importance in achieving optimal responses to treatment.

Carfilzomib/pomalidomide single-agent or in combination with other agents for the management of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis of 37 trials

PURPOSE

The use of carfilzomib/pomalidomide single-agent or in combination with other agents in patients with refractory/relapsed multiple myeloma (RRMM) was not clearly clarified in clinical practice. We sought to compile the available clinical reports to better understand the efficacy and safety of carfilzomib (CFZ) and pomalidomide (POM).

RESULTS

Based on our research criteria, we identified 37 prospective studies that evaluated 1160 patients. Analysis of subgroup differences between carfilzomib single-agent and CFZ/DEX dual combination showed significantly(P < 0.001, I2 = 96.3%), suggesting the overall response rate (ORR) of 66% attained from CFZ/DEX dual combination seemed to be higher than that of 28% from carfilzomib single-agent. And, the same trend favoring CFZ/DEX dual combination was found in ≥VGPR and CBR analysis. The ORR of 31% attained from POM/DEX dual combination was superior to that of 19% from pomalidomide single-agent(P < 0.001, I2 = 94.4%). And, the same trend favoring POM/DEX dual combination was found in ≥VGPR and CBR analysis. However, the ORR of 83% attained from POM/BOR/DEX triplet combination was superior to that of 31% from POM/DEX dual combination(P < 0.001, I2 = 99.1%). And, the same trend favoring POM/BOR/DEX triplet combination was found in ≥VGPR analysis.

METHODS

We searched published reports including carfilzomib and (or) pomalidomide therapy for RRMM who had received bortezomib and (or) lenalidomide.

CONCLUSION

Pomalidomide/Carfilzomib plus dexamethasone seemed to attain a superior response rate compared with pomalidomide/carfilzomib single-agent. Furthermore, the combination of pomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in a much higher response rate compared with pomalidomide plus dexamethasone regimen. These results needed more validation in future trials.

Pembrolizumab, pomalidomide, and low-dose dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor and its ligand (PD-L1) facilitate immune evasion in multiple myeloma (MM). We hypothesized that pembrolizumab, PD-1-antibody, can enhance antimyeloma cellular immunity generated by pomalidomide, leading to improved clinical responses. In this single-center, phase 2 study, 48 patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) received 28-day cycles of pembrolizumab, 200 mg IV every 2 weeks, pomalidomide 4 mg daily for 21 days, and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. Patients had a median of 3 (range: 2-5) lines of therapy, median age 64 (range: 35-83) years, and had received both an immune modulatory drug (IMiD) and proteasome inhibitor: (35 [73%] of 48) were refractory to both; (31 [70%]) had received an autologous transplant, and (30 [62%]) had high-risk cytogenetics. Adverse events grade 3 to 4 occurred in (19 [40%] of 48 patients), including hematologic toxicities (19 [40%]), hyperglycemia (12 [25%]), and pneumonia (7 [15%]). Autoimmune events included pneumonitis (6 [13%]) and hypothyroidism (5 [10%]), mostly ≤ grade 2. Objective responses occurred in (29 [60%] of 48) patients, including stringent complete response/complete response (4 [8%]), very good partial response (9 [19%]), and partial response (16 [33%]); median duration of response was 14.7 months. At median follow-up of 15.6 months, progression-free survival (PFS) was 17.4 months and overall survival was not reached. Analyses of pretreatment marrow samples revealed a trend for increased expression of PD-L1 in responding patients and longer PFS with increased T-lymphocyte infiltrates, irrespective of PD-1 expression. Pembrolizumab, pomalidomide, and low-dose dexamethasone have acceptable safety and durable responses in RRMM patients. This trial was registered at www.clincialtrials.gov as #NCT02289222.

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.

Real-world use of pomalidomide and dexamethasone in double refractory multiple myeloma suggests benefit in renal impairment and adverse genetics: a multi-centre UK experience

Myeloma patients who become refractory to immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) and bortezomib have poor survival, with limited therapeutic options. Pomalidomide has shown improved survival and good tolerability in this patient cohort in clinical trials, but real world data are scarce. We retrospectively analysed all patients treated with pomalidomide at five UK centres between 2013 and 2016. Of 85 patients identified, 70 had sufficient information for response assessments. Median age was 66 years [40-89], 96·5% were refractory to IMiDs, 72·9% were refractory to both an IMiD and bortezomib and 92·9% were refractory to their last treatment. Of 45 patients with fluorescence in situ hybridization results 64% had adverse risk, 19 patients (22·4%) had an estimated glomerular filtration rate <45 ml/min. Grade ≥3 non-haematological toxicities occurred in 42·4%, and grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in 38% and 24% respectively, but only 18·8% had dose reductions. The overall response rate was 52·9%. At a median follow-up of 13·2 months, median progression-free survival was 5·2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 4·150-6·238], and median overall survival was 13·7 months (95% CI 11·775-15·707). No significant difference was seen in response, survival or tolerability by renal function, age or cytogenetic risk. This real-world data support the results seen in published clinical trials.

Dose-finding designs for trials of molecularly targeted agents and immunotherapies

Recently, there has been a surge of early phase trials of molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) and immunotherapies. These new therapies have different toxicity profiles compared to cytotoxic therapies. MTAs can benefit from new trial designs that allow inclusion of low-grade toxicities, late-onset toxicities, addition of an efficacy endpoint, and flexibility in the specification of a target toxicity probability. To study the degree of adoption of these methods, we conducted a Web of Science search of articles published between 2008 and 2014 that describe phase 1 oncology trials. Trials were categorized based on the dose-finding design used and the type of drug studied. Out of 1,712 dose-finding trials that met our criteria, 1,591 (92.9%) utilized a rule-based design, and 92 (5.4%; range 2.3% in 2009 to 9.7% in 2014) utilized a model-based or novel design. Over half of the trials tested an MTA or immunotherapy. Among the MTA and immunotherapy trials, 5.8% used model-based methods, compared to 3.9% and 8.3% of the chemotherapy or radiotherapy trials, respectively. While the percentage of trials using novel dose-finding designs has tripled since 2007, the adoption of these designs continues to remain low.

Management of adverse events induced by next-generation immunomodulatory drug and proteasome inhibitors in multiple myeloma

INTRODUCTION

In the last decade the introduction of novel agents has strongly improved multiple myeloma prognosis by doubling median overall survival. Unfortunately disease relapse is very common and patients may become refractory to previous drugs. Therefore, new therapeutic strategies are urgently needed. Areas covered: We have reviewed the available data on next generation novel agents, particularly immunomodulatory drug pomalidomide and proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib, the latter being the first-in-class orally available. We focused on adverse events associated with such agents and described how they should be managed. The main grade ≥3 adverse events correlated with these drugs are hematologic, myelosuppression-related and reversible; non-hematologic grade ≥3 toxicities are less frequent, with an incidence of <10%. Expert commentary: These agents showed to have a good tolerability. The great majority of adverse events are easily manageable with dose-adjustment and appropriate treatment, and drug discontinuation is not frequent. Favorable safety profile and high efficacy, especially in combination, confer to these drugs a central role in development of new lines of therapy against multiple myeloma. Further investigation is certainly needed to determine the best combinations including these agents.

Practical Considerations in Managing Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Considerable advances have been made in the treatment of relapsed and relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, with numerous novel agents and combination strategies receiving regulatory approval worldwide during the past several years. An increasing body of phase III data has clearly demonstrated increased overall response rates, improved depths of response, and more durable responses when a third novel agent is incorporated into lenalidomide-dexamethasone and bortezomib-dexamethasone platforms, in most cases with acceptable toxicity. The carfilzomib-dexamethasone doublet has also demonstrated promising activity. With this rapid progress has come many new questions. We review the data supporting the use of these novel treatment paradigms for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, discuss the place of autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in this rapidly evolving treatment space, and propose strategies to best use these regimens, considering the disease, host, and previous treatment factors.

Phase 1/2 study of lenalidomide combined with low-dose cyclophosphamide and prednisone in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma

REP is an active combination in MM patients refractory to lenalidomide. REP is an all-oral and generally well-tolerated regimen.

Pomalidomide in the management of relapsed multiple myeloma

Pomalidomide, a very potent member of the immunomodulatory drug family, is considered a standard of care for patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma, who have previously been treated with bortezomib and lenalidomide. Pomalidomide induces both direct myeloma cell death, and indirect antimyeloma response through its impact on the microenvironment (modulation of immune response, inhibition of angiogenesis, inhibition of bone resorption). Pomalidomide in combination with dexamethasone is an approved regimen in Europe and USA based on the results of a Phase III randomized trial. In order to improve response rate and patient survival, pomalidomide is currently being assessed in triplet combinations with other antimyeloma agents. The present review addresses current knowledge regarding the clinical use of pomalidomide in relapsed myeloma patients.

Randomized multicenter phase 2 study of pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone in relapsed refractory myeloma

PomCyDex results in a higher overall response rate than pomalidomide and dexamethasone. PomCyDex is an effective, all oral regimen for refractory myeloma patients.

Sorafenib for the treatment of multiple myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Sorafenib is an orally available compound that acts predominantly by targeting the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway and by inhibiting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Since the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway is implicated in the proliferation of multiple myeloma (MM) cells and VEGF in bone marrow neovascularization, sorafenib is a drug offering the potential for targeting two important pathogenetic mechanisms involved in MM. Thus, sorafenib is being proposed for use in MM.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors discuss the rationale for the use of sorafenib in MM. They then summarize the clinical development of sorafenib in MM, from initial Phase I to Phase II studies. A systematic literature review of the trials was performed using PubMed.

EXPERT OPINION

Preliminary data from phase I/II trials showed that sorafenib had a good safety profile but minimal anti-myeloma activity as a single agent in relapsed/refractory patients. Results of phase II trials, evaluating sorafenib combined with new drugs, such as bortezomib and lenalidomide are eagerly awaited.