Phase II Pethema Trial of Alternating Bortezomib and Dexamethasone As Induction Regimen Before Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation in Younger Patients With Multiple Myeloma: Efficacy and Clinical Implications of Tumor Response Kinetics

Changes in immune subsets during chemotherapy as prognosis biomarkers for multiple myeloma patients by longitudinal monitoring

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a malignancy of plasma cells accompanied by immune dysfunction. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive and dynamic characterization of the peripheral immune environment in MM patients and find its diagnostic and prognostic values for therapy. The peripheral immune profiles of MM inpatients and healthy controls were assessed by flow cytometry. A longitudinal study of immune subsets was observed during cycles of chemotherapy. The diagnostic and prognostic models were established based on immune subsets by the absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and multivariate regression. MM patients possessed an impeded immune landscape, including reduced activation of B cells, increased effective T cells and regulatory T cells (Tregs), augmented CD16 expression on monocytes and dendritic cell percentages, decreased CD56dimCD16+ natural killer cells (NKs), and amplified CD56bright and HLA-DR+ natural killer T cells (NKTs). Chemotherapy has different dynamic effects on specific cells, of which 2 cycles is the key turning point. NKT, dendritic cells, naïve Tc and Th cells, HLA-DR+ Tc cells, CD56dim NKTs, CD16++ monocytes, and CD25+ B cells could have the diagnostic value, and a prognostic model including neutrophils, naïve Tc cells, CD56brightCD16dim NKs, and CD16+ dendritic cells was established with acceptable accuracy. Our data showed dynamic and abnormal peripheral immune profiles in MM patients, which had prognostic values and could provide the basis for clinical therapy.

Immunomodulators in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: current and future concepts

Introduction: Impressive therapeutic progress is being made in the management of multiple myeloma (MM). his progress is related to the introduction of several new classes of therapeutic agents including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs).Areas covered: In this manuscript, the role of the IMiDs thalidomide and lenalidomide in the management of newly diagnosed MM is discussed. The mode of action of IMiDs and their role in the management of newly diagnosed MM patients is highlighted. In addition, clinical data on how MoAbs such as the anti-CD38 antibody daratumumab can further increase the efficacy of IMiD-based first-line anti-myeloma regimens are provided. A database search in PubMed was carried out.Expert Opinion: Immunomodulation has become an indispensable part of successful anti-myeloma regimens both at relapse and at diagnosis. The combination of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone with an anti-CD38 MoAb such as daratumumab and a proteasome inhibitor such as bortezomib is currently one of the most potent first-line treatment regimens for MM. A better understanding on how IMiDs synergize with existing and new anti-myeloma treatments can further improve the outcome for patients. Optimal first-line therapy will continue to benefit the long-term outcome of a growing population of young and elderly MM patients.

Systems Modeling of Bortezomib and Dexamethasone Combinatorial Effects on Bone Homeostasis in Multiple Myeloma Patients

Osteolytic bone disease is one of the most debilitating manifestations of multiple myeloma (MM). Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor that shows both anticancer and bone anabolic properties and is being evaluated for its positive effects in MM patients with skeletal complications. Dexamethasone is a potent corticosteroid that is often given in combination with bortezomib for its antineoplastic effects; however, bone loss and osteoporosis are major adverse effects of long-term steroid-based therapies. In this study, a small systems pharmacological model was developed to integrate the bone anabolic effects of bortezomib with the osteolytic activity of dexamethasone in MM patients with bone disease. The final model parameters were all estimated with good precision. The interaction model is based on codifying multiple regulatory mechanisms of drug action and provides a platform for probing optimized bortezomib and dexamethasone combination dosing regimens to minimize skeletal side effects during myeloma therapy.

A high-risk, Double-Hit, group of newly diagnosed myeloma identified by genomic analysis

Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) with high-risk disease are in need of new treatment strategies to improve the outcomes. Multiple clinical, cytogenetic, or gene expression features have been used to identify high-risk patients, each of which has significant weaknesses. Inclusion of molecular features into risk stratification could resolve the current challenges. In a genome-wide analysis of the largest set of molecular and clinical data established to date from NDMM, as part of the Myeloma Genome Project, we have defined DNA drivers of aggressive clinical behavior. Whole-genome and exome data from 1273 NDMM patients identified genetic factors that contribute significantly to progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (cumulative R² = 18.4% and 25.2%, respectively). Integrating DNA drivers and clinical data into a Cox model using 784 patients with ISS, age, PFS, OS, and genomic data, the model has a cumlative R² of 34.3% for PFS and 46.5% for OS. A high-risk subgroup was defined by recursive partitioning using either a) bi-allelic TP53 inactivation or b) amplification (≥4 copies) of CKS1B (1q21) on the background of International Staging System III, comprising 6.1% of the population (median PFS = 15.4 months; OS = 20.7 months) that was validated in an independent dataset. Double-Hit patients have a dire prognosis despite modern therapies and should be considered for novel therapeutic approaches.

Efficacy and tolerability of bortezomib and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Background:

Outcome in multiple myeloma (MM) has improved substantially over recent years as a result of the availability of multiple novel agents with acceptable safety profile.

Study Design:

Prospective observational study at a tertiary care institute.

Methods:

Twenty-five newly diagnosed patients of MM were treated with bortezomib and dexamethasone induction with monitoring for response and safety, followed by peripheral blood autologous stem cell transplant (PBASCT) in eligible patients or maintenance.

Results:

Out of 25 patients, 32% attained complete response (CR), 56% very good partial response (VGPR), 4% PR, and 8% showed no response. The overall response rate was 92%. In our study, 56% of patients showed hematological side effects, out of which thrombocytopenia was seen in 32%, anemia in 16%, and leukopenia in 8%. Six patients developed bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy, out of which four had grade 1 (66.66%), one had grade 2 (16.66%), and 1 (16.66%) had grade 3 toxicity. Sixteen patients were eligible for PBASCT, out of which eight patients received this therapy while as remaining eight patients opted for two more cycles of induction therapy followed by maintenance. After completing 18 months of maintenance, all the eight patients who underwent PBASCT were in CR. Out of the 15 patients who did not receive PBASCT five attained CR, eight VGPR while as two patients relapsed.

Conclusion:

Bortezomib plus dexamethasone is highly effective and well-tolerated regimen for frontline treatment of MM with a higher quality of response in an advanced stage and renal failure patients.

Targeting complete response with upfront bortezomib consolidation versus observation after the achievement of complete response following autologous transplantation for multiple myeloma (TUBA study)

Complete response (CR) after treatment for multiple myeloma is associated with superior progression-free survival (PFS). Multiple myeloma patients were prospectively recruited for induction treatment with bortezomib and dexamethasone (BD) followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) between 2010 and 2012. If patients did not achieve CR after auto-HCT, BD consolidation therapy was added to target CR. After the BD induction phase (n = 46), greater than or equal to CR was achieved in 4 patients (8%). After auto-HCT (n = 34), greater than or equal to CR was achieved in 9 patients (20%) and very good partial response (VGPR) was achieved in 11 (24%). Of the 24 patients who received auto-HCT and whose response was less than CR, 21 received BD consolidation therapy for a median of 4 courses. Finally, the maximum response with or without BD consolidation was greater than or equal to CR in 19 (41%), VGPR in 7 (15%), and PR in 6 (13%). Through BD consolidation, CR was achieved in 8 of 11 patients with post-HCT VGPR and in 2 of 12 patients with post-HCT PR. In total, 4 year PFS and overall survival were 43 and 80%, respectively. After adjusting for clinical factors, there was no difference in PFS between CR patients after auto-HCT and BD consolidation, while patients with less than or equal to VGPR after consolidation had a significantly lower PFS. Patients with post-HCT CR showed good PFS, and targeting CR through BD consolidation could improve the CR rate. It would be worthwhile to prospectively compare the efficacy of consolidation only for patients who failed to achieve CR to a universal consolidation strategy.

Long-term outcomes of different bortezomib-based regimens in Chinese myeloma patients

Bortezomib has significantly increased the response rates in multiple myeloma (MM), but optimal bortezomib-based regimens for initial MM therapy have not yet been defined. We retrospectively compared the outcomes of 128 patients newly diagnosed with symptomatic MM who received either bortezomib combined with dexamethasone (PD) or three-drug combinations of PD with liposomal doxorubicin (PAD) or thalidomide (PTD). The overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response (VGPR) rate, and complete remission CR/near-complete remission (nCR) results were better for the PAD and PTD regimens than for the PD group. Three-year overall survival (OS) was 80.1%, 72.5%, and 61.8% with PAD, PTD, and PD regimens, respectively. The 3-year OS rate of PAD and PTD was significantly higher than that of PD (80.1% vs 61.8%, P=0.024; 72.5% vs 61.8%, P=0.035), but the difference was not statistically significant between PAD and PTD (80.1% vs 72.5%, P=0.843). Similarly, the PAD and PTD regimens resulted in significantly superior 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates. The patients in the PTD arm were more frequently observed with grade 1–3 peripheral neuropathy (PN), compared to those in the PAD and PD groups, especially grade 2–3 PN. PN developed less frequently without sacrificing the efficacy when bortezomib was administered subcutaneously rather than intravenously. Our experience suggests that the three-drug combinations PAD and PTD produce a better outcome than PD, especially with respect to PAD, with fewer adverse events.

The addition of dexamethasone to bortezomib for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma improves outcome but ongoing maintenance therapy has minimal benefit

Despite the common practice of combining dexamethasone (Dex) with bortezomib (Bz) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), until now there has been few prospective trials undertaken. We undertook a trial that recapitulated the original APEX study except that dexamethasone was incorporated from cycle 1. We also incorporated an exploratory maintenance component to the study. Twenty sites enrolled 100 relapsed/or refractory MM patients utilizing eight 21 day cycles of IV Bz [1.3 mg/m(2) ; Day (D) 1, 4, 8, 11] and three 35 day cycles; Bz (1.3 mg/m(2) ; Day (D) 1, 8, 15, 22). Our study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00335348). Patients with stable disease or better received maintenance Bz (1.3 mg/m(2) ) every 14 days until progression. Dexamethasone (20 mg) was given for 2 days with each Bz dose. A prospectively defined matched-analysis of primary (overall response rate; ORR) and secondary endpoints [Complete Response (CR) and time to progression (TTP)] compared our cohort to those on the Bz arm of the APEX trial. The addition of Dex improved ORR by 20% (56% vs. 36%) [odds ratio 0.44 (0.24-0.80)]. The median TTP was also significantly longer (10.1 vs. 5.1 months) (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% CI: 0.35-0.72, P = 0.0002) and our landmark analysis demonstrated that this was largely due to the early use of dexamethasone, as we were unable to demonstrate any benefit of bortezomib/dexamethasone maintenance therapy.

How I treat relapsed myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell malignancy leading to significant life-expectancy shortening. Although the incorporation of the novel agents thalidomide, bortezomib, and lenalidomide in the front-line therapy has resulted in significant improvement, almost all patients relapse, making the treatment of relapse a real challenge. In the present article, when and how to treat relapsed MM is discussed. Treatment can be safely delayed in a subset of patients with asymptomatic relapse, whereas those with symptomatic relapse, advanced disease at diagnosis, or significant paraproteinemic increase require prompt rescue therapy. The benefit of retreatment and the use of a sequential approach for successive relapses considering drug synergism are highlighted. For patients with aggressive relapses and for those who have exhausted all available options, continued therapy until disease progression is recommended, particularly when using regimens with a long-term safety profile. Patients with a duration response to a first autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) longer than 2 years may benefit from a second ASCT. Patients with aggressive disease and/or poor cytogenetics at diagnosis relapsing within the first 2 years from ASCT should be considered for an allogeneic transplantation. Finally, a number of newer promising drugs are being actively investigated and the enrolment of patients in clinical trials is encouraged.

Retrospective matched-pairs analysis of bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus bortezomib monotherapy in relapsed multiple myeloma

Bortezomib-dexamethasone is widely used for relapsed myeloma in routine clinical practice, but comparative data versus single-agent bortezomib are lacking. This retrospective analysis compared second-line treatment with bortezomib-dexamethasone and bortezomib using 109 propensity score-matched pairs of patients treated in three clinical trials: MMY-2045, APEX, and DOXIL-MMY-3001. Propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression analyses incorporating 13 clinical variables related to drug exposure or clinical outcome. Patients received intravenous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, in 21-day cycles, alone or with oral dexamethasone 20 mg on the days of/after bortezomib dosing. Median bortezomib cumulative dose (27.02 and 28.60 mg/m(2)) and treatment duration (19.6 and 17.6 weeks) were similar with bortezomib-dexamethasone and bortezomib, respectively. The overall response rate was higher (75% vs. 41%; odds ratio=3.467; P<0.001), and median time-to-progression (13.6 vs. 7.0 months; hazard ratio [HR]=0.394; P=0.003) and progression-free survival (11.9 vs. 6.4 months; HR=0.595; P=0.051) were longer with bortezomib-dexamethasone versus bortezomib, respectively. Rates of any-grade adverse events, most common grade 3 or higher adverse events, and discontinuations due to adverse events appeared similar between the groups. Two patients per group died of treatment-related adverse events. These data indicate the potential benefit of bortezomib-dexamethasone compared with single-agent bortezomib at first relapse in myeloma. The MMY-2045, APEX, and DOXIL-MMY-3001 clinical trials were registered at, respectively, clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 00908232, 00048230, and 00103506.

The choice of regimens based on bortezomib for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Introduction

Bortezomib has significantly improved multiple myeloma (MM) response rates, but strategies for choosing bortezomib-based regimens for initial MM therapy are not standardized. Here, we describe four bortezomib-based therapies in Chinese MM patients to determine the optimal chemotherapeutic approach.

Methods

Newly diagnosed symptomatic MM patients at three hematological centers between February 1, 2006 and May 31, 2013 were treated with therapies including bortezomib plus dexamethasone (PD) or combinations of PD with either adriamycin (PAD), cyclophosphamide (PCD) or thalidomide (PTD) for every 28 days.

Results

The overall response rate of all the 215 eligible patients was 90.2%. The ORR for PCD, PAD, PTD and PD were 97.4%, 93.2%, 85.3% and 77.8% while the effects with VGPR or better were 63.7%, 62.7%, 44.2% and 37.8%, respectively. The effect of ORR, VGPR and CR/nCR for the PCD regimen was better than the PD protocol. Median PFS for all patients was 29.0 months with significant differences observed among treatment groups. Median OS of all the patients was not reached, but three-drug combinations were superior to PD alone. Frequently observed toxicities were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, infection, herpes zoster, and peripheral neuropathy. The incidence of peripheral neuropathy (PN) in PTD group was significantly higher than other three groups, especially grade 2–3 PN. Treatment with anti-viral agent acyclovir significantly reduced the incidence of herpes zoster.

Conclusions

Our experience indicated that bortezomib-based regimens were effective and well-tolerated in the Chinese population studied; three-drug combinations PCD, PAD were superior to PD, especially with respect to PCD.

Initial treatment of transplant-eligible patients in multiple myeloma

Induction therapy followed by intensification with ASCT is the standard of care in younger patients with multiple myeloma. Three-drug induction regimens combining novel agents (VTD, VRD, VCD, PAD) have shown a high CR rate both, pretransplant and posttransplant. Patients with high-risk cytogenetics continues to have an inferior outcome even when treated with novel agents. The role of tandem autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is not well established, although some studies show a better outcome with tandem ASCT as compared to single auto. The high response rate obtained with novel agents also raises the question if autologous transplant has a role in front-line therapy or if it should be used as savage therapy after relapse.

Bortezomib for the treatment of previously untreated multiple myeloma

Management of multiple myeloma (MM) has been drastically changed in the last 10 years thanks to the introduction of novel agents, which, combined with the backbone of classical chemotherapy, have led to a significant improvement in disease control. Bortezomib is the first reversible proteasome inhibitor approved for the treatment of MM, with wide synergism in vitro and in vivo with a plethora of drugs active for MM. In patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), the achievement of complete response or very good partial response before ASCT is associated with prolonged progression-free and overall survival. Thus, the goal of induction regimens should include, at least for younger patients, a continued improvement of the quality and depth of the achieved response. This article is focused on reviewing the major efforts in frontline therapy for MM, including bortezomib-containing induction regimens in patients either eligible or ineligible for ASCT.

Diagnosis and therapy of multiple myeloma

Many advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma have been made due to the use of transplantation and the introduction of novel agents including thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib. The first step is recognizing the symptoms and starting prompt treatment. Different strategies should be selected for young and elderly subjects. Young patients are commonly eligible for transplantation, which is now considered the standard approach for this setting, and various inductions therapies containing novel agents are available before transplantation. Elderly patients are usually not eligible for transplantation, and gentler approaches with new drugs combinations are used for their treatment.

Efficacy of bortezomib as first-line treatment for patients with multiple myeloma

Recent years have seen a dramatic change in the approach towards diagnosing and treating Multiple Myeloma. Newer and more target specific approach to treatment has prolonged the survival for patients with multiple myeloma. The proteasome inhibitors make an important class of anti-myeloma drugs that disrupts the proteolytic machinery of the tumor cells preferentially, enhancing their susceptibility to apoptosis. Bortezomib, in particular has shown significant clinical efficacy in myeloma treatment. It is the most commonly used proteasome inhibitor and has been tested to be effective in prolonging the overall survival in several trials. Its combinations with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone are the treatment of choice for standard risk patients following the mSMART guidelines. The success with its lower dosage in elderly and its proven efficacious subcutaneous usage makes Bortezomib a useful agent for maximizing patient compliance and minimizing therapy related toxicity and costs. This review discusses several trials where Bortezomib has been used as a single/combination agent for front-line treatment of multiple myeloma.

Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation as first-line treatment in myeloma: a global perspective of current concepts and future possibilities

Stem cell transplantation forms an integral part of the treatment for multiple myeloma. This paper reviews the current role of transplantation and the progress that has been made in order to optimize the success of this therapy. Effective induction chemotherapy is important and a combination regimen incorporating the novel agent bortezomib is now favorable. Adequate induction is a crucial adjunct to stem cell transplantation and in some cases may potentially postpone the need for transplant. Different conditioning agents prior to transplantation have been explored: high-dose melphalan is most commonly used and bortezomib is a promising additional agent. There is no well-defined superior transplantation protocol but single or tandem autologous stem cell transplantations are those most commonly used, with allogeneic transplantation only used in clinical trials. The appropriate timing of transplantation in the treatment plan is a matter of debate. Consolidation and maintenance chemotherapies, particularly thalidomide and bortezomib, aim to improve and prolong disease response to transplantation and delay recurrence. Prognostic factors for the outcome of stem cell transplant in myeloma have been highlighted. Despite good responses to chemotherapy and transplantation, the problem of disease recurrence persists. Thus, there is still much room for improvement. Treatments which harness the graft-versus-myeloma effect may offer a potential cure for this disease. Trials of novel agents are underway, including targeted therapies for specific antigens such as vaccines and monoclonal antibodies.

Targeting the proteasome with bortezomib in multiple myeloma: update on therapeutic benefit as an upfront single agent, induction regimen for stem-cell transplantation and as maintenance therapy

Bortezomib is the first therapeutic inhibitor of the proteasome that has demonstrated a significant clinical response in patients with otherwise refractory or rapidly advancing disease. Bortezomib has received US Federal Drug Administration approval for the treatment of the hematologic malignancies such as multiple myeloma and mantle cell lymphoma. Herein, the use of bortezomib as an upfront therapy, as an induction regimen before stem-cell transplantation and as maintenance therapy in the treatment of multiple myeloma is discussed.

IMWG consensus on maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma

Maintaining results of successful induction therapy is an important goal in multiple myeloma. Here, members of the International Myeloma Working Group review the relevant data. Thalidomide maintenance therapy after autologous stem cell transplantation improved the quality of response and increased progression-free survival (PFS) significantly in all 6 studies and overall survival (OS) in 3 of them. In elderly patients, 2 trials showed a significant prolongation of PFS, but no improvement in OS. A meta-analysis revealed a significant risk reduction for PFS/event-free survival and death. The role of thalidomide maintenance after melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide is not well established. Two trials with lenalidomide maintenance treatment after autologous stem cell transplantation and one study after conventional melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide induction therapy showed a significant risk reduction for PFS and an increase in OS in one of the transplant trials. Maintenance therapy with single-agent bortezomib or in combination with thalidomide or prednisone has been studied. One trial revealed a significantly increased OS with a bortezomib-based induction and bortezomib maintenance therapy compared with conventional induction and thalidomide maintenance treatment. Maintenance treatment can be associated with significant side effects, and none of the drugs evaluated is approved for maintenance therapy. Treatment decisions for individual patients must balance potential benefits and risks carefully, as a widely agreed-on standard is not established.

Lower dose dexamethasone/thalidomide and zoledronic acid every 3 weeks in previously untreated multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Physicians in Asia have anecdotally reported that Asian patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are frequently intolerant of conventional doses of dexamethasone (Dex) and/or thalidomide (Thal). Since zoledronic acid (Zol) has an anti-MM effect in preclinical studies, we investigated whether the approved 3-times-weekly Zol combined with lower dose Dex/Thal could be an effective and better tolerated regimen in Asian patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this first Asian cooperative multicenter phase II study, previously untreated patients with MM (N = 44) received up to 6 cycles of 3-times-weekly low-dose Dex/Thal and 4 mg Zol (the dtZ regimen). Response was graded using Bladé criteria.

RESULTS

The average doses of Dex and Thal administered were 185.2 mg/month; and 87.5 mg/day, respectively. Thirty-nine (88.6%) patients demonstrated at least a partial response (PR), including 18.2% very good partial response (VGPR), 15.9% near complete response (nCR) and 18.2% complete response (CR). Achievement of CR/nCR was related to significant (P < .05), rapid, and sustained inhibition of osteoclasts (OCs) and OC precursors (pOCs) by Zol. Sepsis was the most frequently reported serious toxicity, contributing to 3 of 4 deaths. Importantly, there was no peripheral neuropathy, osteonecrosis of the jaw, or nephrotoxicity.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the dtZ regimen is an effective and well-tolerated regimen for Asian patients with newly diagnosed MM. The high rate of VGPR/nCR/CR suggests that Zol could have a clinically relevant anti-MM effect. Since infections are the most frequent adverse event, it is probably wise to further lower the dose of Dex in future studies.

An overview of the VISTA trial: newly diagnosed, untreated patients with multiple myeloma ineligible for stem cell transplantation

Multiple myeloma, a plasma cell neoplasm, is the second most common hematologic malignancy after non-Hodgkins lymphoma and is responsible for 2% of cancer deaths. Melphalan and prednisone (MP) has been the standard treatment in elderly patients for many decades. The VISTA study evaluated the effect of this combination with or without the first-in-class proteasome inhibitor bortezomib in newly diagnosed myeloma patients who were not candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation. Altogether 682 patients were enrolled and prospectively randomized in this trial. All patients received nine 6-week cycles of oral melphalan (9 mg/m2) and prednisone (60 mg/m2) on days 1–4, either alone or with bortezomib administered intravenously (1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29 and 32 during the first four cycles and on days 1, 8, 22, 29 during remaining course of therapy). Median time to progression (the primary end point of the trial) was 24 months in the bortezomib-containing group compared with 16.6 months in the control group (p < 0.001). Response was evaluated in 337 patients receiving bortezomib compared with 331 patients in the control group who received MP alone; the percentages of partial response or better was 71 vs 35% (p < 0.001), with complete response seen in 30 vs 4%, respectively (p < 0.001). Median response duration in both groups was 19.9 versus 13.1 months, respectively. Median overall survival has not been reached in VMP group compared with 43 months in the MP group (p < 0.001), and this benefit is maintained after long term follow-up and subsequent antimyeloma therapies. Hematological adverse events (AEs) were similar in both groups, although patients in the bortezomib group experienced more frequent peripheral sensory neuropathy (including 13% grade 3, with less than 1% grade 4). Overall, the occurrence of grade 3 AEs was higher in patients receiving bortezomib (53 vs 44%, p = 0.02), but the risk of grade 4 AEs was identical (28 vs 27%). These results confirm the superiority of MP plus bortezomib combination over MP therapy in treatment-naive patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation.

Evolving role of high dose stem cell therapy in multiple myeloma

Conventional chemotherapy has been used in the treatment of multiple myeloma. However the development of autologous stem cell transplant represented a major advance in its therapy. Complete response (CR) rates to the tune of 40-45% were seen and this translated into improvements in progression-free survival and also overall survival in some studies. As a result the autologous stem cell transplants (ASCT) is the standard of care in eligible patients and can be carried out with low treatment-related mortality. Allogenic transplant carries the potential for cure but the high mortality associated with the myeloablative transplant has made it unpopular. Reduced Intensity Stem Cell Transplants (RIST) have been tried with varying success but with a high degree of morbidity as compared to the ASCT. Introduction of newer agents like thalidomide, lenalidomide, bortezomib and liposomal doxorubicin into the induction regimens has resulted in higher CR and very good partial response rates (VGPR) as well as improvement in ease of administration. These drugs have also proved useful in patients with adverse cytogenetics. Recent trials suggest that this has translated into improvements in response rates post-ASCT. There is a suggestion that patients achieving CR/nCR or VGPR after induction therapy should be placed on maintenance and ASCT then could be used as a treatment strategy at relapse. All these trends however await confirmation from further trials. Tandem transplants have been used to augment the results obtained with ASCT and have demonstrated their utility in patients who achieved only a partial response or stable disease in response to the first transplant as well as patients with adverse cytogenetics. Incorporation of bortezomib along with melphalan into the conditioning regimen has also been tried. RIST following ASCT has been tried with varying success but does not offer any major advantage over ASCT and is associated with higher morbidity. It is hoped that recent advances in therapy will contribute greatly to improved survival.

International Myeloma Working Group consensus approach to the treatment of multiple myeloma patients who are candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation

The role of high-dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) continues to evolve in the novel agent era. The choice of induction therapy has moved from conventional chemotherapy to newer regimens incorporating the immunomodulatory derivatives thalidomide or lenalidomide and the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. These drugs combine well with traditional therapies and with one another to form various doublet, triplet, and quadruplet regimens. Up-front use of these induction treatments, in particular 3-drug combinations, has affected unprecedented rates of complete response that rival those previously seen with conventional chemotherapy and subsequent ASCT. Autotransplantation applied after novel-agent-based induction regimens provides further improvement in the depth of response, a gain that translates into extended progression-free survival and, potentially, overall survival. High activity shown by immunomodulatory derivatives and bortezomib before ASCT has recently led to their use as consolidation and maintenance therapies after autotransplantation. Novel agents and ASCT are complementary treatment strategies for MM. This article reviews the current literature and provides important perspectives and guidance on the major issues surrounding the optimal current management of younger, transplantation-eligible MM patients.

Bortezomib and thalidomide, a steroid free regimen in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma

Despite their efficacy in myeloma, corticosteroids have acute and chronic toxicities. Newer agents with significant anti-myeloma activity permit the development of steroid-free regimens. We designed a Phase II clinical trial to study the toxicity and efficacy of a steroid-free combination of bortezomib and thalidomide as a first-line treatment in patients with symptomatic myeloma. Patients received bortezomib 1·3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 every 21 d and thalidomide 150 mg/d for a maximum of eight cycles. Amongst 27 evaluable patients, the overall response was 81·5% with 25·8% near complete response or greater. The response rate was comparable to most other two drug combinations for upfront therapy but lower than that obtained with the use of three drugs. The most common grade 3 toxicities were peripheral neuropathy (22%), pneumonia (15%), fatigue (7%) and anaemia (7%). Peripheral neuropathy completely resolved in 80% of the patients upon completion of therapy, but not in the remaining 20% of patients. No venous thromboembolic events were observed even in the absence of prophylactic anticoagulation. The median progression-free survival was 16·8 months (95% confidence interval 8·7-21·6 months). Median overall survival has not yet been reached at a median follow up of 39 months. The 3-year overall survival was 74%. This study demonstrates: (i) the efficacy of a steroid-free regimen; (ii) mostly reversible treatment-related peripheral neuropathy; and (iii) the absence of venous thrombotic events.

Clinical impact of chromosomal aberrations in multiple myeloma

Chromosomal aberrations are frequently found in multiple myeloma cells and play a major role in patient outcome and management of the disease. The most important chromosomal aberrations associated with poor outcome are del(17p), t(4;14), t(14;16) and t(14;20). Others that may be associated with adverse prognosis include amp(1)(q21), del(1p32), del(13), del(8p21) and hypodiploidy. Many chromosomal aberrations have no or uncertain impact; for example, t(11;14), t(8;14) and hyperdiploidy. Attempts have been made to overcome the negative prognostic impact of chromosomal aberrations using autologous or allogeneic transplantation or new immunomodulatory drugs such as thalidomide, lenalidomide and the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib, but the results are controversial. Data suggest that allogeneic transplantation and treatment with bortezomib or lenalidomide may help to overcome the negative effect of del(13) on prognosis, whereas bortezomib may have some influence on reducing the impact of del(17p), t(4;14) and t(14;16). Chromosome analysis should always be performed at diagnosis of multiple myeloma to improve the prediction of outcome and to aid treatment decision-making.

Clinical and biological features of t(4;14) multiple myeloma: a prospective study

The t(4;14) translocation, found in 15% of multiple myeloma (MM), indicates a poor prognosis. Clinico-biological features associated with this severe outcome and the impact of novel agents are unknown. We report a series of 102 consecutive patients with t(4;14) MM. The median age was 56 years. The isotype was IgA in 42%, and the median serum β(2)-microglobulin was 2.3 mg/L. FGFR3 expression was lacking in 20 (19%) cases. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) or smoldering MM (sMM) was found in 26 patients (25%). Seven (27%) became symptomatic in a median time of 9 months. Fifty-six of 76 patients with symptomatic MM received high-dose therapy (HDT). The overall response rate (ORR) was 93% (22% CR, 44% VGPR), and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12 months. Twenty-four (37%) patients experienced aggressive relapse. Post-second-line ORR was 51% and the median PFS was 7 months, with a trend for longer PFS in patients treated with a bortezomib-based regimen. Median overall survival after HDT was 31 months. t(4;14) is detected in patients with MGUS/sMM and this does not require immediate chemotherapy. Patients with t(4;14) MM have a high ORR after HDT, contrasting with a short PFS and aggressive relapses, and, despite novel agents, still have a poor prognosis.

Firstline treatment and maintenance in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients

High dose therapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard of care for eligible newly diagnosed MM patients. Several randomized studies demonstrated a survival advantage for patients undergoing transplantation, compared with conventional chemotherapy. Introduction of new drugs in this setting have markedly increased survival rates within the last 10 years. Efforts to further improve response rates and survival in those patients are still needed, mainly by increasing the depth of tumor reduction and the duration of response through more effective induction, consolidation and maintenance therapies. Nevertheless, this approach is currently challenged by the promising results of long-term treatment with novel agents. Recent data suggest that the upfront combination of a proteasome inhibitor plus one immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) is highly effective. The most promising 3-drug association might be Bortezomib, Lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRD). Adjunction of a 4th drug is not proven to be more efficient. Consolidation and maintenance therapies are emerging in all trials with great results. For elderly patients, or not eligible for ASCT, the introduction of novel agents has also changed the management of the disease. Melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide and bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone are the two standards of care. Current trials are challenging the role of alkylators in the frontline setting. Maintenance therapy is also undergoing evaluation.

Proteasome inhibition and its therapeutic potential in multiple myeloma

Due to an unmet clinical need for treatment, the first in class proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, moved from drug discovery to FDA approval in multiple myeloma in an unprecedented eight years. In the wake of this rapid approval arose a large number of questions about its mechanism of action and toxicity as well as its ultimate role in the treatment of this disease. In this article, we briefly review the preclinical and clinical development of the drug as the underpinning for a systematic review of the large number of clinical trials that are beginning to shed some light on the full therapeutic potential of bortezomib in myeloma. We conclude with our current understanding of the mechanism of action of this agent and a discussion of the novel proteasome inhibitors under development, as it will be progress in these areas that will ultimately determine the true potential of proteasome inhibition in myeloma.

Mechanisms of peripheral neuropathy associated with bortezomib and vincristine in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a prospective analysis of data from the HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial

BACKGROUND

Bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy is a dose-limiting toxicity in patients with multiple myeloma, often requiring adjustment of treatment and affecting quality of life. We investigated the molecular profiles of early-onset (within one treatment cycle) versus late-onset (after two or three treatment cycles) bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy and compared them with those of vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy during the induction phase of a prospective phase 3 trial.

METHODS

In the induction phase of the HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial, patients (aged 18-65 years) with newly diagnosed Salmon and Durie stage 2 or 3 multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to three cycles of bortezomib-based or vincristine-based induction treatment. We analysed the gene expression profiles and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of pretreatment samples of myeloma plasma cells and peripheral blood, respectively. This study is registered, number ISRCTN64455289.

FINDINGS

We analysed gene expression profiles of myeloma plasma cells from 329 (39%) of 833 patients at diagnosis, and SNPs in DNA samples from 369 (44%) patients. Early-onset bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy was noted in 20 (8%) patients, and 63 (25%) developed the late-onset type. Early-onset and late-onset vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy was noted in 11 (4%) and 17 (7%) patients, respectively. Significant genes in myeloma plasma cells from patients that were associated with early-onset bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy were the enzyme coding genes RHOBTB2 (upregulated by 1·59 times; p=4·5×10(-5)), involved in drug-induced apoptosis, CPT1C (1·44 times; p=2·9×10(-7)), involved in mitochondrial dysfunction, and SOX8 (1·68 times; p=4·28×10(-13)), involved in development of peripheral nervous system. Significant SNPs in the same patients included those located in the apoptosis gene caspase 9 (odds ratio [OR] 3·59, 95% CI 1·59-8·14; p=2·9×10(-3)), ALOX12 (3·50, 1·47-8·32; p=3·8×10(-3)), and IGF1R (0·22, 0·07-0·77; p=8·3×10(-3)). In late-onset bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy, the significant genes were SOD2 (upregulated by 1·18 times; p=9·6×10(-3)) and MYO5A (1·93 times; p=3·2×10(-2)), involved in development and function of the nervous system. Significant SNPs were noted in inflammatory genes MBL2 (OR 0·49, 95% CI 0·26-0·94; p=3·0×10(-2)) and PPARD (0·35, 0·15-0·83; p=9·1×10(-3)), and DNA repair genes ERCC4 (2·74, 1·56-4·84; p=1·0×10(-3)) and ERCC3 (1·26, 0·75-2·12; p=3·3×10(-3)). By contrast, early-onset vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy was characterised by upregulation of genes involved in cell cycle and proliferation, including AURKA (3·31 times; p=1·04×10(-2)) and MKI67 (3·66 times; p=1·82×10(-3)), and the presence of SNPs in genes involved in these processes-eg, GLI1 (rs2228224 [0·13, 0·02-0·97, p=1·18×10(-2)] and rs2242578 [0·14, 0·02-1·12, p=3·00×10(-2)]). Late-onset vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy was associated with the presence of SNPs in genes involved in absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion-eg, rs1413239 in DPYD (3·29, 1·47-7·37, 5·40×10(-3)) and rs3887412 in ABCC1 (3·36, 1·47-7·67, p=5·70×10(-3)).

INTERPRETATION

Our results strongly suggest an interaction between myeloma-related factors and the patient's genetic background in the development of treatment-induced peripheral neuropathy, with different molecular pathways being implicated in bortezomib-induced and vincristine-induced peripheral neuropathy.

Bortezomib plus dexamethasone is superior to vincristine plus doxorubicin plus dexamethasone as induction treatment prior to autologous stem-cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results of the IFM 2005-01 phase III trial

PURPOSE

To compare efficacy and safety of bortezomib plus dexamethasone and vincristine plus doxorubicin plus dexamethasone (VAD) as induction before stem-cell transplantation in previously untreated myeloma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Four hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned to VAD (n = 121), VAD plus dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DCEP) consolidation (n = 121), bortezomib plus dexamethasone (n = 121), or bortezomib plus dexamethasone plus DCEP (n = 119), followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation. Patients not achieving very good partial response (VGPR) required a second transplantation. The primary end point was postinduction complete response/near complete response (CR/nCR) rate.

RESULTS

Postinduction CR/nCR (14.8% v 6.4%), at least VGPR (37.7% v 15.1%), and overall response (78.5% v 62.8%) rates were significantly higher with bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus VAD; CR/nCR and at least VGPR rates were higher regardless of disease stage or adverse cytogenetic abnormalities. Response rates were similar in patients who did and did not receive DCEP. Post first transplantation, CR/nCR (35.0% v 18.4%) and at least VGPR (54.3% v 37.2%) rates remained significantly higher with bortezomib plus dexamethasone. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 36.0 months versus 29.7 months (P = .064) with bortezomib plus dexamethasone versus VAD; respective 3-year survival rates were 81.4% and 77.4% (median follow-up, 32.2 months). The incidence of severe adverse events appeared similar between groups, but hematologic toxicity and deaths related to toxicity (zero v seven) were more frequent with VAD. Conversely, rates of grade 2 (20.5% v 10.5%) and grades 3 to 4 (9.2% v 2.5%) peripheral neuropathy during induction through first transplantation were significantly higher with bortezomib plus dexamethasone.

CONCLUSION

Bortezomib plus dexamethasone significantly improved postinduction and post-transplantation CR/nCR and at least VGPR rates compared with VAD and resulted in a trend for longer PFS. Bortezomib plus dexamethasone should therefore be considered a standard of care in this setting.

Primary therapy with single agent bortezomib as induction, maintenance and re-induction in patients with high-risk myeloma: results of the ECOG E2A02 trial

Single agent bortezomib results in response rates of 51% in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) and is touted to be especially effective in high-risk disease. We are the first to prospectively explore single agent bortezomib as primary therapy (response rate, maintenance and reinduction) without consolidative autologous stem cell transplant in a cohort selected to have high-risk MM. Patients received 8-cycles of induction followed by maintenance bortezomib every other week indefinitely. Patients relapsing on maintenance had full induction schedule resumed. On an intention to treat basis the response rate (>=PR) was 48%. Among 7 patients, who progressed on maintenance bortezomib and received reinduction, two responded. With a median follow-up of 48.2 months, 1- and 2-year OS probabilities were 88% (95%CI, 74–95%) and 76% (95%CI, 60–86%), respectively. Median PFS was 7.9 months (95%CI, 5.8–12.0). Twenty-three and 34 patients had >=grade 3 hematologic and non-hematologic toxicity, respectively with treatment emergent neuropathy in: 7%, motor grade 1–2; 56%, sensory grade 1–2 and 2%, grade 3; and 14%, neuropathic pain grade 1–2 in and 2%, grade 3. In high-risk patients, upfront bortezomib results in response rates comparable to those reported for unselected cohorts, but single agent bortezomib is not sufficient as primary therapy.

Peripheral neuropathy and new treatments for multiple myeloma: background and practical recommendations

In multiple myeloma, peripheral neuropathy has for a long time been considered as mainly secondary to the plasma cell dyscrasia itself. With the advent of new targeted drugs such as thalidomide and bortezomib, the iatrogenic neurotoxicity has become the leading cause of peripheral neuropathy. This review discusses the pathogenesis, incidence, risk factors, diagnosis, characteristics, and management of peripheral neuropathy related to new multiple myeloma drugs, mainly bortezomib and thalidomide. The current knowledge of the pathophysiology of the new forms of peripheral neuropathy is still limited. The mechanisms involved depend on the agents used, patient's medical history, and duration of exposure and/or treatment doses or sequence. Diagnosis of such peripheral neuropathy is often easier than treatment. A full anamnesis and regular clinical evaluation are necessary. Electrophysiological assessments may support the diagnosis, although their contribution remains insufficient. Complex clinical features may require a specialized neurological assessment within the context of a multi-disciplinary approach. Finally, early detection of peripheral neuropathy and the use of dose adjustment algorithms as in the case of bortezomib, should help reduce the side effects while maintaining anti-tumor efficacy.

How best to use new therapies in multiple myeloma

Advances in the molecular understanding of myeloma have led to the development of novel agents such as immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib). When used alone, these agents have significant activity against myeloma and responses increase significantly when they are combined with additional agents including glucocorticosteroids and chemotherapeutic agents such as alkylators. There is a drive to use these novel agents in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma, where they lead to impressive response rates with increasing duration of responses. In addition, novel agents are now the mainstays of therapy for relapsed disease. In the following paper, we summarize the key observations from recent completed and ongoing studies that determined the effect of these novel therapies both in the setting of newly diagnosed myeloma and for relapsed disease. We also discuss our approach to the use of these agents in specific myeloma settings.

Bortezomib plus dexamethasone can improve stem cell collection and overcome the need for additional chemotherapy before autologous transplant in patients with myeloma

The aim of this phase II trial was to investigate the efficacy of bortezomib plus dexamethasone (Vel-Dex) as induction therapy in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and to define the role of intensification before transplantation. Fifty-seven patients were treated with four courses of Vel-Dex, two cycles of dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide and cisplatin (DCEP), and a single autologous transplant. Fourteen patients (25%) went off-study: seven after Vel-Dex, seven after DCEP. All patients yielded high numbers of stem cells (median CD34+ cells 7.5 x 106/kg); 54 of the 57 patients (94%) collected > or =4 x 106/kg CD34+ cells, 60% with a single leukapheresis. The overall response rate (ORR) after Vel-Dex was 86% (70% had a very good partial response [VGPR] or better) regardless of cytogenetic abnormalities and International Staging System stage (ISS). The response at the end of the two DCEP cycles remained unchanged in 35 patients (70%), worsened in 15 (20%), and improved in 5 (10%). Because of the consistent drop-out, the ORR in intention-to-treat analysis decreased significantly from 86% after Vel-Dex to 76% after DCEP, and 73% after transplantation. However, when considering the subset of 43 patients who completed the program, the ORR was 96% (complete response 39%, VGPR 41%, partial response 16%). In conclusion, Vel-Dex produces high response rates, improves stem cell collection, and overcomes the need for intensification before autologous transplantation.

Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone compared with melphalan and prednisone in previously untreated multiple myeloma: updated follow-up and impact of subsequent therapy in the phase III VISTA trial

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to confirm overall survival (OS) and other clinical benefits with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) versus melphalan and prednisone (MP) in the phase III VISTA (Velcade as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple Myeloma) trial after prolonged follow-up, and evaluate the impact of subsequent therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Previously untreated symptomatic patients with myeloma ineligible for high-dose therapy received up to nine 6-week cycles of VMP (n = 344) or MP (n = 338).

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 36.7 months, there was a 35% reduced risk of death with VMP versus MP (hazard ratio, 0.653; P < .001); median OS was not reached with VMP versus 43 months with MP; 3-year OS rates were 68.5% versus 54.0%. Response rates to subsequent thalidomide- (41% v 53%) and lenalidomide-based therapies (59% v 52%) appeared similar after VMP or MP; response rates to subsequent bortezomib-based therapy were 47% versus 59%. Among patients treated with VMP (n = 178) and MP (n = 233), median survival from start of subsequent therapy was 30.2 and 21.9 months, respectively, and there was no difference in survival from salvage among patients who received subsequent bortezomib, thalidomide, or lenalidomide. Rates of adverse events were higher with VMP versus MP during cycles 1 to 4, but similar during cycles 5 to 9. With VMP, 79% of peripheral neuropathy events improved within a median of 1.9 months; 60% completely resolved within a median of 5.7 months.

CONCLUSION

VMP significantly prolongs OS versus MP after lengthy follow-up and extensive subsequent antimyeloma therapy. First-line bortezomib use does not induce more resistant relapse. VMP used upfront appears more beneficial than first treating with conventional agents and saving bortezomib- and other novel agent-based treatment until relapse.

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma beyond 2010

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is considered the gold standard in the frontline therapy of younger patients with multiple myeloma because it results in higher complete remission (CR) rates and longer event-free survival than conventional chemotherapy. The greatest benefit from ASCT is obtained in patients achieving CR after transplantation, the likelihood of CR being associated with the M-protein size at the time of transplantation. The incorporation of novel agents results in higher pre- and posttransplantation CR rates. Induction with bortezomib-containing regimens is encouraging in patients with poor-risk cytogenetics. However, longer follow-up is required to assess the impact of this increased CR on long-term survival. The results of posttransplantation consolidation/maintenance with new drugs are encouraging. All this indicates that, in the era of novel agents, high-dose therapy should be optimized rather than replaced. Because of its high transplantation-related mortality, myeloablative allografting has been generally replaced by reduced-intensity conditioning (reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation). The best results are achieved after a debulky ASCT, with a progression-free survival plateau of 25% to 30% beyond 6 years from reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation. The development of novel reduced-intensity preparative regimens and peri- and posttransplantation strategies aimed at minimizing graft-versus-host disease, and enhancing the graft-versus-myeloma effect are key issues.

Treatment of multiple myeloma: a comprehensive review

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a neoplastic plasma cell disorder that results in end-organ damage (hypercalcemia, renal insufficiency, anemia, or skeletal lesions). Patients should not be treated unless they have symptomatic (end-organ damage) MM. They should be classified as having high-risk or standard-risk disease. Patients are classified as high risk in the presence of hypodiploidy or deletion of chromosome 13 (del[13]) with conventional cytogenetics, the presence of t(4:14), t(14;16), t(14;20) translocations or del(17p) with fluorescence in situ hybridization. High-risk disease accounts for about 25% of patients with symptomatic MM. If the patient is deemed eligible for an autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), 3 or 4 cycles of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone, or bortezomib and dexamethasone, or thalidomide and dexamethasone are reasonable choices. Stem cells should then be collected and one may proceed with an ASCT. If the patient has a complete response or a very good partial response (VGPR), the patient may be followed without maintenance therapy. If the patient has a less than VGPR, a second ASCT is encouraged. If the patient is in the high-risk group, a bortezomib-containing regimen to maximum response followed by 2 additional cycles of therapy is a reasonable approach. Lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone is another option for maintenance until progression. If the patient is considered ineligible for an ASCT, then melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide is suggested for the standard-risk patient, and melphalan, prednisone, and bortezomib (MPV) for the high-risk patient. Treatment of relapsed or refractory MM is covered. The novel therapies-thalidomide, bortezomib, and lenalidomide-have resulted in improved survival rates. The complications of MM are also described. Multiple myeloma is a plasma cell neoplasm that is characterized by a single clone of plasma cells producing a monoclonal protein (M-protein). The malignant proliferation of plasma cells produces skeletal destruction that leads to bone pain and pathologic fractures. The M-protein might lead to renal failure, hyperviscosity syndrome, or through the suppression of uninvolved immunoglobulins, recurrent infections. Anemia and hypercalcemia are common complications.