Bendamustine-bortezomib-dexamethasone is an active and well-tolerated regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

Therapeutic plasma exchange for hyperviscosity syndrome in IgA multiple myeloma

Hyperviscosity syndrome (HVS) is defined as the symptomatic presentation of increased blood thickness due to various clinical conditions such as hypergammaglobulinemia. HVS secondary to immunoglobulin (Ig)A multiple myeloma has been infrequently reported. Although the efficiency of IgM or IgG removal by therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) is well described, the efficiency of IgA removal by TPE is not as well known. Here, we describe a case of HVS due to IgA myeloma in a patient who received 2 TPE treatments, with subsequent symptomatic improvement as well as decrease in IgA and viscosity levels.

Comparable efficacy of oral bendamustine versus intravenous administration in treating hematologic malignancies

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze potential differences in antitumor efficacy and pharmacokinetics between intravenous (IV) bendamustine and a novel orally administered (PO) bendamustine agent that is utilizing the beneficial properties of superstaturated solid dispersions formulated in nanoparticles.

METHODS

Pharmacokinetics of IV versus PO bendamustine were determined by analysis of plasma samples collected from NSG mice treated with either IV or PO bendamustine. Plasma samples were analyzed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry following a liquid-liquid extraction to determine peak bendamustine concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and the half-life in-vivo. In-vitro cytotoxicity of bendamustine against human non-Hodgkin Burkitt's Lymphoma (Raji), multiple myeloma (MM.1s), and B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (RS4;11) cell lines was determined over time using MTS assays. Luciferase-tagged versions of the aforementioned cell lines were used to determine in-vivo bendamustine cytotoxicity of IV versus PO bendamustine at two different doses.

RESULTS

Bendamustine at a high dose in-vitro causes cell death. There was no significant difference in antitumor activity between IV and novel PO bendamustine at a physiologically relevant concentration in all three xenograft models. In-vivo pharmacokinetics showed the oral bioavailability of bendamustine in mice to be 51.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel oral bendamustine agent tested exhibits good oral bioavailability and systemic exposure for in-vivo antitumor efficacy comparable to IV bendamustine. An oral bendamustine formulation offers exciting clinical potential as an additional method of administration for bendamustine and warrants further evaluation in clinical studies.

Comparable Efficacy of Oral Bendamustine versus Intravenous Administration in Treating Hematologic Malignancies

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to analyze potential differences in antitumor efficacy and pharmacokinetics between intravenous (IV) bendamustine (BEN) and a novel orally administered bendamustine agent (PO) that is utilizing the beneficial properties of superstaturated solid dispersions formulated in nanoparticles.

Methods

Pharmacokinetics of IV versus PO BEN were determined by analysis of plasma samples collected from NSG mice treated with either IV or PO BEN. Plasma samples were analyzed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) following a liquid-liquid extraction to determine peak BEN concentration (Cmax), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and the half-life (t1/2) in-vivo. in-vitro cytotoxicity of BEN against human non-Hodgkin's Burkitt's Lymphoma (Raji), multiple myeloma (MM.1s), and B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (RS4;11) cell lines was determined over time using MTS assays. Luciferase-tagged versions of the aforementioned cell lines were used to determine in-vivo BEN cytotoxicity of IV versus PO BEN at two different doses.

Results

Bendamustine at a high dose in-vitro causes cell death. There was no significant difference in antitumor efficacy between IV and novel PO BEN at a physiologically relevant concentration in all three xenograft models. In-vivo pharmacokinetics showed the oral bioavailability of BEN in mice to be 51.4%.

Conclusions

The novel oral BEN agent tested exhibits good oral bioavailability and systemic exposure for in-vivo antitumor efficacy comparable to IV BEN. An oral BEN formulation offers exciting clinical potential as an additional method of administration for bendamustine and warrants further evaluation in clinical studies.

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.

Excessive serine from the bone marrow microenvironment impairs megakaryopoiesis and thrombopoiesis in Multiple Myeloma

Thrombocytopenia is a major complication in a subset of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). However, little is known about its development and significance during MM. Here, we show thrombocytopenia is linked to poor prognosis in MM. In addition, we identify serine, which is released from MM cells into the bone marrow microenvironment, as a key metabolic factor that suppresses megakaryopoiesis and thrombopoiesis. The impact of excessive serine on thrombocytopenia is mainly mediated through the suppression of megakaryocyte (MK) differentiation. Extrinsic serine is transported into MKs through SLC38A1 and downregulates SVIL via SAM-mediated tri-methylation of H3K9, ultimately leading to the impairment of megakaryopoiesis. Inhibition of serine utilization or treatment with TPO enhances megakaryopoiesis and thrombopoiesis and suppresses MM progression. Together, we identify serine as a key metabolic regulator of thrombocytopenia, unveil molecular mechanisms governing MM progression, and provide potential therapeutic strategies for treating MM patients by targeting thrombocytopenia.

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.

How to Manage Patients with Lenalidomide-Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Although lenalidomide-based combinations, such as lenalidomide plus a proteasome inhibitor or an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, improve the overall response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), there is a tendency to use these regimens as a frontline treatment. This strategy has led to the development of refractoriness early in the disease course, usually after the patient's first treatment. Since lenalidomide-free regimens have so far shown limited efficacy in lenalidomide-refractory patients, there is an unmet need for other treatment options. In this review, we discuss the therapeutic options available to treat the general population of lenalidomide-refractory patients (mono, double and triple refractory) and the subpopulation of patients with other high-risk features such as renal failure, extramedullary disease, and high-risk cytogenetics. Moreover, new promising individual therapies and the possible impact of immunotherapy in RRMM patients are debated.

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.

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.

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.

Carfilzomib, bendamustine, and dexamethasone in patients with advanced multiple myeloma: The EMN09 phase 1/2 study of the European Myeloma Network

BACKGROUND

Combined therapy with carfilzomib, bendamustine, and dexamethasone was evaluated in this multicenter phase 1/2 trial conducted within the European Myeloma Network (EMN09 trial).

METHODS

Sixty-three patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who had received ≥2 lines of prior therapy were included. The phase 1 portion of the study determined the maximum tolerated dose of carfilzomib with bendamustine set at 70 mg/m² on days 1 and 8. After 8 cycles, responding patients received maintenance therapy with carfilzomib and dexamethasone until progression.

RESULTS

On the basis of the phase 1 results, the recommended phase 2 dose for carfilzomib was 27 mg/m² twice weekly in weeks 1, 2, and 3. Fifty-two percent of patients achieved a partial response or better, and 32% reached a very good partial response or better. The clinical benefit rate was 93%. After a median follow-up of 21.9 months, the median progression-free survival was 11.6 months, and the median overall survival was 30.4 months. The reported grade ≥3 hematologic adverse events (AEs) were lymphopenia (29%), neutropenia (25%), and thrombocytopenia (22%). The main nonhematologic grade ≥3 AEs were pneumonia, thromboembolic events (10%), cardiac AEs (8%), and hypertension (2%).

CONCLUSIONS

In heavily pretreated patients who have relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, combined carfilzomib, bendamustine, and dexamethasone is an effective treatment option administered in the outpatient setting. Infection prophylaxis and attention to patients with cardiovascular predisposition are required.

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.

How to Treat High-Risk Myeloma at Diagnosis and Relapse

Survival in multiple myeloma has improved greatly during the past 2 decades, but this change has primarily benefited patients who have standard-risk disease. Patients with high-risk disease remain a challenge to diagnose and treat. To improve their clinical outcomes, it is imperative to develop tools to readily identify them and to provide them with the most effective available treatments. The most widely used stratification system, the revised International Staging System, incorporates serum β-2 microglobulin, albumin, lactate dehydrogenase, and high-risk chromosomal abnormalities [del(17p), t(4;14), and t(14;16)]. Recent updates have included mutational status and chromosome 1q abnormalities. Plasma cell leukemia, extramedullary disease, circulating plasma cells, renal failure, and frailty are also associated with poor outcome. The treatment approach for a newly diagnosed patient with high-risk multiple myeloma should include induction therapy, autologous stem cell transplantation if appropriate, and maintenance therapy. Triplet therapy with a proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and steroid, with or without an anti-CD38 antibody, should be considered for induction, along with a proteasome inhibitor and/or immunomodulatory drug for maintenance. Aiming for a deep and sustained response is important. Similar principles apply at relapse, with close monitoring of response, especially extramedullary disease and active management of side effects, so that patients can continue therapy and benefit from treatment. Immune-based therapies, including autologous CAR T-cell-based therapies and bispecific antibodies, show promising activity in relapsed disease and are being actively explored in earlier disease settings. As the prognosis for high-risk disease remains poor, the future goal for this patient group is to develop specific clinical trials to explore novel approaches and therapies efficiently.

Prognostic impact of rapid reduction of involved free light chains in multiple myeloma patients under first-line treatment with Bendamustine, Prednisone, and Bortezomib (BPV)

Introduction

Light chain involvement is observed in almost every patient (pt) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Owing to a relatively short half-life, rapid reduction in the involved free light chain (iFLC) is of potential prognostic value.

Methods

This retrospective analysis included 92 pts with newly diagnosed MM treated with bendamustine, prednisone, and bortezomib (BPV).

Results

After a median number of two (range 1–5) BPV cycles, the majority of pts (n = 86; 93%) responded with either sCR (n = 21), CR (n = 1), nCR (n = 25), VGPR (n = 20), or PR (n = 19). PFS and OS at 48 months were 39% and 67%, respectively. At baseline, 79 out of 92 pts (86%) had iFLC levels above the upper standard level and an abnormal ratio of involved to uninvolved free light chain ≥ 8. In a subgroup analysis of these pts, we evaluated the prognostic importance of an early reduction of the iFLC during the first two BPV cycles. A reduction ≥ 50% of the iFLC on day 8 of the first cycle was observed in 31 of 69 pts. These pts had a significantly better median PFS of 49 months as compared to 20 months in 38 pts with a lower iFLC reduction (p = 0.002). In contrast, OS did not differ significantly with a 48 months survival of 77% vs 69% (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

These results indicate that a rapid decrease in the iFLC on day 8 is an early prognostic marker for newly diagnosed MM pts undergoing BPV treatment.

First-line therapy with bendamustine/prednisone/bortezomib-A GMMG trial for non-transplant eligible symptomatic multiple myeloma patients

OBJECTIVES

The German-speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG) conducted this trial to investigate efficacy and safety of the three-drug combination bendamustine/prednisone/bortezomib (BPV) as first-line therapy for elderly patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

METHODS

Elderly MM patients requiring first-line therapy and not eligible for intensive treatment were enrolled in this phase IIb multicenter study. Patients were treated with BPV regimen for a maximum of nine cycles.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients were included in the trial with a median age of 76 years. Nineteen patients had renal impairment at baseline. The ORR was 78.8% for patients treated with 3 and more BPV cycles and 71.1% for all evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival was 25 months, and overall survival at 24 months was 83.3%. The clinical benefit rate including MR was 91.2%. In patients with renal impairment at baseline, a renal response was observed in 11 pts. with complete recovery of the renal function in six patients. The most frequent CTC grade 3/4 AEs experienced by patients were hematological (17.5%) and infectious (9.8%) complications. No new safety signals were observed for the study drugs under investigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Bendamustine/prednisone/bortezomib may serve as a first-line regimen for transplant-ineligible elderly MM patients in particular for patients with renal impairment requiring a fast and durable renal response.

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).

Pixantrone demonstrates significant in vitro activity against multiple myeloma and plasma cell leukemia

Treatment results for multiple myeloma and plasma cell leukemia have considerably improved, but cure remains elusive and establishing new therapeutic approaches constitutes a major unmet clinical need. We analyzed the anti-myeloma properties of the aza-anthracenedione pixantrone which has been successfully used in a phase III study for the treatment of patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma as monotherapy as well as in combination regimes in vitro and in an adapted in vivo model (ex ovo chicken chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) assay). Pixantrone significantly inhibited proliferation and metabolic activity of all investigated myeloma cell lines. Importantly, anti-myeloma effects were more pronounced in tumor cell lines than in stromal cells, mesenchymal stem cells, and peripheral blood mononuclear cells of healthy controls. Apoptosis of myeloma cell lines was observed only after a 7-day incubation period, indicating a fast cytostatic and a slower cytotoxic effect of this drug. Pixantrone reduced the viability of primary plasma cells of patients and induced downregulation of myeloma-cell growth in the CAM assay. Additionally, we demonstrate in vitro synergism between pixantrone and the histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat with respect to its anti-proliferative features. From these data, we conclude that systematic investigations of the clinical usefulness of pixantrone in the framework of controlled clinical trials are clearly indicated (e.g., in penta-refractory patients).

Treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma: Evidence-based recommendations

The practice of choosing the next best therapy for patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is becoming increasingly complex. There is no clear consensus regarding the best treatment sequence for RRMM. With the approval of novel proteasome inhibitors (ixazomib and carfilzomib), immunomodulatory agents (pomalidomide), monoclonal antibodies (daratumumab and elotuzumab), and other targeted therapies, multiple combination regimens utilizing these agents are being studied with the goal of enhancing disease control, prolonging progression-free survival, and improving overall survival. We, herein, describe a review of FDA-approved regimens for RRMM patients and offer a paradigm in selecting subsequent treatment regimens, focusing on patient specific morbidity, treatment toxicity, and disease-specific characteristics.

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).

Proteasome inhibition by MG-132 protects against deltamethrin-induced apoptosis in rat hippocampus

AIMS

Deltamethrin (DM), a type II synthetic pyrethroid insecticide, is widely used in agriculture and home pest control. The evaluation of their toxic effects is of major concern to public health. However, the molecular mechanism of DM-induced neurodegenerative disease is still far from clear. This study was designed to investigate the potential role of ubiquitin proteasome system (UPS) in DM-induced neurotoxicity where the proteasome inhibitor MG-132 could mitigate the neurotoxic effects.

MAIN METHODS

Male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into two batches. The first batch of rats was administrated with a single dose of DM (12.5 mg/kg) by intraperitoneal injections (i.p.) and the animals were then euthanized at 5, 24, and 48 h post injection. The second batch was treated as follow: control group, DM (12.5 mg/kg) groups for 24 h, MG-132 (0.5 mg/kg, i.p.) 2 h plus DM 24 h group, and MG-132 alone group. Ubiqutinatied proteins, DNA damage and apoptosis were investigated.

KEY FINDINGS

DM treatment induced the ubiquitinated proteins expression with the peaks at 5 h. Moreover, DM increased DNA damage, early apoptotic rate, the expression level of Cleaved Caspase-3, caspase-3 activity and decreased the expression level of Bcl-2 at DM 24 h group. Compared to DM 24 h group, MG-132 pretreatment significantly down-regulated ubiquitinated proteins, lowered the DNA damage and apoptosis by decreasing Caspase-3 and increasing Bcl-2 expression.

SIGNIFICANCE

These results indicate that MG-132 effectively alleviates DM-induced DNA damage and apoptosis by inhibiting ubiquitinated proteins. UPS may play a role in DM-induced neurodegenerative disorders.

Bortezomib retreatment for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma in real-world clinical practice

AIMS

Studies have shown that bortezomib retreatment is effective in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). The observational, prospective electronic VELCADE® OBservational Study (eVOBS) study assessed bortezomib-based therapies for patients with MM in everyday practice. Here, we report on those patients receiving retreatment with bortezomib.

METHODS

Consenting adults scheduled to receive bortezomib for MM were enrolled at 162 sites across Europe, Canada, Brazil, Russia, and Turkey between 2006 and 2010. Retrospective data on prior therapies and prospective observational data after bortezomib initiation were captured electronically at baseline, after every bortezomib cycle, and every 12 weeks after discontinuation or progression. Investigator-assessed responses and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Ninety-six of 873 patients enrolled to eVOBS received bortezomib as first retreatment for progressive disease during the prospective observation period. Median age was 62 years, 53% were male, and median number of prior therapies at retreatment was 4. Overall, 41% of patients initiated bortezomib retreatment in combination with dexamethasone, 16% in combination with lenalidomide, and 21% received monotherapy. Rate of partial response or better (≥PR) was 75% at initial bortezomib therapy, including 44% complete response (CR)/near CR (nCR); at retreatment, ≥PR rate was 46%, including 15% CR/nCR. Median progression-free survival was 11.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.1-12.7) from start of initial bortezomib treatment and 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.4-7.2) from start of retreatment. Median overall survival from start of retreatment was 17.6 months (95% CI: 14.4-23.5). Of the 96 patients retreated with bortezomib, 77% reported an AE. Peripheral neuropathy during bortezomib retreatment occurred in 49% of patients, including 10% grade 3/4.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that retreatment with bortezomib is a feasible option for patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

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 look at treatment strategies for relapsed multiple myeloma

INTRODUCTION

Multiple myeloma treatment considerably improved during the past decade, thanks to novel effective drugs, a better understanding of myeloma biology and clonal heterogeneity, and an improved management of toxicities. The choice of regimen at relapse is usually based on prior response, toxicities, age and comorbidities of relapsed patients. Areas covered: A review was performed of the most recent and effective therapeutic strategies for the relapsed myeloma setting, by documenting the latest clinical evidence from phase II and III clinical trials. Of note, new drugs, such as carfilzomib, ixazomib, pomalidomide, daratumumab and elotuzumab, alone or in combinations in doublet or triplet regimens, have greatly increased the treatment armamentarium against myeloma. Expert commentary: Impressive results have been obtained with new drugs in relapsed patients. Besides number of prior therapies and previous response, other factors play a crucial role in the selection of therapy. Re-challenge with previous drugs can be adopted if previous responses lasted at least 6 months and therapy had induced low toxicity. Patients' risk status can further help to appropriately select therapy at relapse, and clinical trials will allow physicians to use newer targeted therapies and immune-therapies, thus delaying palliative approaches to later relapse stages.

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.

The proteasome and proteasome inhibitors in multiple myeloma

Proteasome inhibitors are one of the most important classes of agents to have emerged for the treatment of multiple myeloma in the past two decades, and now form one of the backbones of treatment. Three agents in this class have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration-the first-in-class compound bortezomib, the second-generation agent carfilzomib, and the first oral proteasome inhibitor, ixazomib. The success of this class of agents is due to the exquisite sensitivity of myeloma cells to the inhibition of the 26S proteasome, which plays a critical role in the pathogenesis and proliferation of the disease. Proteasome inhibition results in multiple downstream effects, including the inhibition of NF-κB signaling, the accumulation of misfolded and unfolded proteins, resulting in endoplasmic reticulum stress and leading to the unfolded protein response, the downregulation of growth factor receptors, suppression of adhesion molecule expression, and inhibition of angiogenesis; resistance to proteasome inhibition may arise through cellular responses mediating these downstream effects. These multiple biologic consequences of proteasome inhibition result in synergistic or additive activity with other chemotherapeutic and targeted agents for myeloma, and proteasome inhibitor-based combination regimens have become established as a cornerstone of therapy throughout the myeloma treatment algorithm, incorporating agents from the other key classes of antimyeloma agents, including the immunomodulatory drugs, monoclonal antibodies, and histone deacetylase inhibitors. This review gives an overview of the critical role of the proteasome in myeloma and the characteristics of the different proteasome inhibitors and provides a comprehensive summary of key clinical efficacy and safety data with the currently approved proteasome inhibitors.

The multiple myeloma treatment landscape: international guideline recommendations and clinical practice in Europe

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines provide recommendations on the management of multiple myeloma (MM), but there are no standard algorithms for the choice and sequencing of treatments. As a result, there is widespread variation in the interpretation and implementation of these guidelines. Areas covered: This review will cover: the real-world data on MM treatment patterns; the approved agents available for the treatment of MM; a comparative summary of the national and international clinical guidelines; a discussion on the impact reimbursement decisions have on treatment availability. Expert commentary: In the future, treatment choices may become even more complex as clonal heterogeneity is better understood in the context of response to treatment, and next-generation agents become available. Although information on real-world practice patterns can provide further guidance, to date, few studies have generated data on patients treated with the newer agents in real-world settings. Furthermore, the translation of guideline recommendations into clinical practice across Europe is inconsistent. Additional real-world data are therefore vital to understanding current clinical practice patterns, so that new agents can be effectively incorporated into existing treatment strategies. Such information may aid the development of better guidance, which will ultimately help to ensure that patients receive the best possible care.

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.

Clinical Outcomes Related to the Use of Bendamustine Therapy for Multiple Myeloma Patients Relapsed/Refractory to Immunomodulatory Drugs and Proteasome Inhibitors

Objective:

Multiple myeloma patients who are relapsed or refractory to both proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) have been reported to have poor outcomes. Bendamustine has been reported to have an antitumor effect in newly diagnosed as well as relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of bendamustine therapy in heavily pretreated MM patients who were refractory to PIs and IMiDs.

Materials and Methods:

Nineteen RRMM patients treated either with bendamustine and steroids (n=13) or a combination of bendamustine with novel drugs (n=6) were included. The median number of previous treatment lines was 5 (minimum-maximum: 3-8) and median time from diagnosis was 6 years (minimum-maximum: 1-16). All of the patients were resistant to at least one of the IMiDs and one of the PIs. Bendamustine was given at doses ranging from 90 mg/m² to 120 mg/m² on days 1 and 2 of 28-day cycles.

Results:

A median of 2 (minimum-maximum: 1-8) treatment cycles was administered per patient. The toxicity of bendamustine was mild and mostly of hematological origin. No complete remission was achieved. There was partial remission and stable disease in 21% and 11% of the patients, respectively. Sixty-eight percent of patients had progressive disease. The median progression-free survival and overall survival was 2 and 4 months, respectively.

Conclusion:

Bendamustine therapy was well tolerated but showed limited anti-myeloma activity in heavily pretreated patients who were refractory to IMiDs and PIs.

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.

A case of efficacy of bendamustine in heavily pretreated multiple myeloma, refractory to pomalidomide

In this report, we would like to highlight the efficacy of bendamustine in a heavily pretreated patient, also refractory to pomalidomide. It is conceivable that different therapy combinations in heavily treated Multiple myeloma (MM) have to be explored, without “a priori” exclusion of ancient drugs, even after failure of the ultimate pharmacological options.

In this report, we would like to highlight the efficacy of bendamustine in a heavily pretreated patient, also refractory to pomalidomide. It is conceivable that different therapy combinations in heavily treated Multiple myeloma (MM) have to be explored, without “a priori” exclusion of ancient drugs, even after failure of the ultimate pharmacological options.

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.

Phase II study of bendamustine, bortezomib and dexamethasone (BBD) in the first-line treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who are not candidates for high dose chemotherapy

The combination of bendamustine, bortezomib and dexamethasone (BBD) was evaluated as a first-line therapy for multiple myeloma. The original treatment regimen of bendamustine 80 mg/m² , days 1, 4; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m² , days 1, 4, 8, 11; dexamethasone 40 mg, days 1, 2, 3, 4 on a 28-day cycle (up to 8 cycles) was efficacious but determined relatively toxic in an interim analysis. The regimen was amended to bendamustine 80 mg/m² , days 1, 2; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m² , days 1, 8, 15; dexamethasone 20 mg, days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 every 28 days (up to 8 cycles), then maintenance 1·3 mg/m² IV bortezomib every 2 weeks. Fifty-nine patients were enrolled. Primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate. The original schema was given for a median of 7 cycles (range 1-8); modified schema was given for a median of 8 cycles (range 1-8) plus maintenance. Overall response was 91%, CR was 9%. Median follow-up was 19·1 months; median progression-free survival was 11·1 months and 18·9 months on the original and modified regimens, respectively. The most common Grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue and neuropathy. The combination of BBD is tolerable and efficacious in this patient population. Modifications to decrease intensity but increase duration translated to better outcomes.

Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response Relationship of Carfilzomib in Patients With Multiple Myeloma

A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model and exposure-response (E-R) analysis was developed using data collected from 5 phase 1b/2 and 2 phase 3 studies in subjects with multiple myeloma. Subjects receiving intravenous infusion on 2 consecutive days each week for 3 weeks (days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16) in each cycle at doses ranging from 15 to 20/56 mg/m² (20 mg/m² in cycle 1 and, if tolerated, escalated to 56 mg/m² on day 8 of cycle 1). The population PK analysis indicated that among all the covariates tested, the only statistically significant covariate was body surface area on carfilzomib clearance; however, this covariate was unlikely to be clinically significant. Despite inclusion of different populations (relapsed or relapsed/refractory), treatments (carfilzomib monotherapy or combination therapy), infusion lengths (2 to 10 minutes or 30 minutes), and different doses, the E-R analysis of efficacy showed that after adjusting for baseline characteristics, higher area under the concentration-time curve was associated with improved overall response rate (ORR), from 15 to 20/56 mg/m² . No positive relationships between maximum concentration and ORR were identified, indicating that ORR would not be expected to be impacted by infusion length. For safety end points, no statistically significant relationship between exposure and increasing risk of adverse events was identified. The results of an E-R analysis provided strong support for a carfilzomib dose at 20/56 mg/m² as a 30-minute infusion for monotherapy and combination therapy. This article illustrates an example of application of E-R analysis to support labeling dose recommendation in the absence of extensive clinical data.

Retreatment with Bendamustine-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone in a Patient with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

The clinical management of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and the correct choice of the most suitable therapy in heavily pretreated and fragile patients are tough clinical issues for clinicians. In advanced phases of disease, the choice of available therapies becomes very poor, and the retreatment with previously adopted and effective therapy, although unpredictable, could be an effective option. In this report, we describe the clinical history of a patient, previously treated with 9 lines of therapy, refractory to bortezomib and IMIDs, for whom the retreatment with bendamustine resulted in a stable disease with good quality of life.

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.

A phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation study of pralatrexate in combination with bortezomib in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Pralatrexate inhibits folic acid metabolism, and preclinical studies have shown that it is cytotoxic to multiple myeloma cells. This phase 1 study investigated the safety and efficacy of pralatrexate in combination with bortezomib in adults with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. A standard 3 + 3 design was used. Patients received intravenous pralatrexate at doses ranging from 10 to 30 mg/m(2) and intravenous bortezomib at a dose of 1·3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 4-week cycle. Eleven patients were enrolled and completed a median of two cycles. The maximum tolerated dose was 20 mg/m(2) . Two patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity of mucositis. The most frequent non-haematological toxicities were fatigue (55%) and mucositis (45%). There were three serious adverse events in three patients: rash, sepsis and hypotension. One patient (9%) had a very good partial response, 1 (9%) had a partial response, 1 (9%) had minimal response and two (18%) had progressive disease. The median duration of response was 4 months, the median time to next treatment was 3·4 months and the median time to progression was 4 months. Pralatrexate, in combination with bortezomib, was generally safe and demonstrated modest activity in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01114282.