Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 4734-4734

Abstract: Introduction: Bendamustine, a bifunctional alkylating agent, exerts a mechanism of action different from that of other conventional alkylators despite it remains mostly unknown. In patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed-refractory MM bendamustine has proven to be active either as monotherapy or in combination with new drugs, particularly bortezomib and immunomodulatory agents. Methods: The preliminary results of this prospective, phase II study conducted in 22 Italian centres are recently published (Blood Cancer J. 2013, 3: e162). Here we present the conclusive results of the combination Bendamustine (70 mg/m2 days 1, 8), Bortezomib (1.3 mg/ m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) and Dexamethasone (20 mg days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12) (BVD) administered every 4 weeks in patients with relapsed-refractory MM of any age, with adequate cardiac, liver and hematological function, not refractory to bortezomib and treated with no more than four previous lines of therapy. The primary endpoint of this study was achievement of a response at least PR, as to IMWG criteria, after four cycles of BVD. Patients achieving a response less than a PR were taken off-study. Patients obtaining at least a PR received two additional treatment cycles followed by a 12-months consolidation phase with cycles repeated every 2 months. Therefore, patients with a PR after the induction phase could receive up to 18 months of treatment and up to 12 cycles of BVD. Results: 75 patients were included in the study. Median age was 68 years (range 41-85 years), 26.5% had ISS stage 3, 19% IgA myeloma and 9% renal failure. Eight of 36 evaluable patients (22%) had high-risk cytogenetics. Patients had received a median of one prior line of therapy (range 1-4). All patients had received prior treatment with new drugs, such as thalidomide (57%), lenalidomide (54.5%), bortezomib (46.5%) or both (20%). Twenty-four patients (32%) were refractory to IMIDs. Best response rate was 75%, including 14 CRs (20%), 22 VGPRs (24%) and 27 PRs (31%). Five patients (6.5%) died early. Only prior treatment with bortezomib significantly reduced the response rate ≥ PR (48.5% vs 80%; P = 0.004). At a median follow-up of 27 months (range 18-38), 45 patients had progressed and 43 had died. Median TTP and PFS were 17 and 12.5 months, respectively while median OS was 24 months (40% at 3 years). After longer follow-up, prior therapy with bortezomib plus lenalidomide was confirmed as the only factor that significantly reduced TTP (9 vs 19 months; HR = 2.7; 95% CI = 1.3-5.8; P = 0.009), PFS (9 vs 15 months; HR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.2-3.8; P = 0.020) and OS (17 vs 32 months; HR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.2-3.9; P = 0.043). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 55% of patients leading to therapy reduction in 24% and to protocol discontinuation in 11% of patients. The most frequent severe adverse events were thrombocytopenia (28%), neutropenia (20%), infections (12%), peripheral neuropathy (9%), gastrointestinal (5%) and cardiovascular events (4%). Compared with younger, patients aged 〉 70 years had a significantly higher incidence of grade 3-4 side effects particularly thrombocytopenia and infections with, consequently, a higher rate of therapy reduction and discontinuation. Moreover, 4/5 early deaths occurred in patients aged more than 70 years. Conclusions: BVD combination is an effective and well tolerated regimen in relapsed-refractory MM. Data suggest that the optimal target of BVD maybe patients younger than 70 years who has not previously received both bortezomib and lenalidomide. Disclosures Offidani: Mundipharma, Janssen: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Bendamustine. Corvatta:Janssen: Honoraria. Ballanti:Janssen: Honoraria. Brunori:Janssen: Honoraria.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V124.21.4734.4734

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2014

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 122, No. 21 ( 2013-11-15), p. 1974-1974

Abstract: Bendamustine, a bi-functional alkylating agent comprising a purine-like benzimidazole ring an a nitrogen mustard group, exerts a peculiar mechanism of action if compared to most conventional alkylators and this may partially explain its effectiveness in alkylator-resistant cells. In patients with MM several studies demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of bendamustine as monotherapy or in combination with new drugs, particularly bortezomib that was found to enhance the in vitro sensitivity of MM cells to bendamustine. These observations represented the rationale for our protocol design namely to evaluate the combination bendamustine (70 mg/m2 days 1, 8), bortezomib (1.3 mg/ m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) and dexamethasone (20 mg days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12) (BVD). Cycles were administered every 4 weeks up to four cycles. Patients achieving a response less than a PR were taken off-study. Patients obtaining at least a PR received two additional treatment cycles followed by a 12-months consolidation phase with cycles repeated every 2 months. Therefore, patients with a PR after the induction phase could receive up to 18 months of treatment and up to 12 cycles of BVD. Patients with relapsed/refractory MM of any age, with adequate cardiac, liver and hematological function, not refractory to bortezomib and treated with no more than four previous lines of therapy were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm, open-label, phase II study conducted in 21 Italian centres. The primary endpoint was achievement of a response at least PR after four cycles of BVD and response was assessed according to to IMWG criteria. From March 2011 to June 2012, 75 patients were included. Median age was 68 years (range 41-85), 26.5% had ISS stage 3, 19% IgA myeloma and 9% renal failure. In total, 8 of 36 evaluable patients (22%) had adverse cytogenetics. All patients had received prior treatment with new drugs, including targeted agents such as thalidomide (57%), lenalidomide (54.5%) or bortezomib (46.5%). Patients had received a median of one prior line of therapy (range 1-4), including alkylators (69%), anthracyclines (29%) and ASCT (44%). Twenty-four patients (32%) were refractory to IMIDs. The response rate ≥ PR after four cycles of BVD was 71.5%, including 11 patients with CR (16%), 13 VGPRs (18.5%) and 26 PRs (37%). Also, 14 patients (20%) had disease stabilization while 6 (8.5%) had progressive disease. Median time to response was 1.2 months (range 0.9-1.4 months). Only prior treatment with bortezomib significantly reduced the response rate ≥ PR (54.5% vs 86.5%; P = 0.003). At a median follow-up of 12 months (range 6-24), 30 patients had progressed and 18 had died. Median TTP and PFS were 16.5 months and 15.5 months, respectively while median OS had not been reached and 78% of patients were alive at 1 year. The Cox regression analysis identified prior therapy with bortezomib plus lenalidomide as the only factor that significantly reduced TTP (9 vs 17 months; HR = 4.5; 95% CI = 1.7-12.3; P = 0.005) Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 55% of patients leading to therapy reduction in 20% and to protocol discontinuation in 10.5% of patients. The most frequent severe adverse events were thrombocytopenia (30.5%), neutropenia (18.5%), infections (12%), peripheral neuropathy (8%), gastrointestinal and cardiovascular events (both 6.5%). Compared with younger, patients aged 〉 70 years had a significantly higher incidence of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (22% vs 37%; p=0.042) and severe infections (7 vs 19%; p=0.047) and consequently a higher rate of therapy reduction (9% vs 34.5%; p=0.007) and therapy discontinuation (7% vs 15.5%; p=0.043). Moreover, 4/5 early deaths occurred in patients aged more than 70 years. BVD combination is an effective regimen in relapsed-refractory MM patients since it elicits rapid, high ( 〉 70%) and good quality of response (more than a third of patients achieved CR + VGPR). Moreover, BVD combination is a feasible and well tolerated regimen provided that adapted therapy and adequate antibiotic prophylaxis are employed in patients older than 70 years. Disclosures: Offidani: Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Bendamustine.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V122.21.1974.1974

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2013

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 122, No. 21 ( 2013-11-15), p. 3126-3126

Abstract: The quality of response and the residual disease after treatment are important prognostic factors in several hematological diseases including multiple myeloma (MM). Several papers demonstrated that the deeper the response after treatment, the longer the survival. However few data are available on the monitoring of minimal residual disease (MRD) during the maintenance therapy in transplant eligible MM patients. Aims to evaluate the role of maintenance therapy in reducing MRD and the role of monitoring the response to predict clinical relapse. Patients and Methods newly diagnosed MM patients enrolled in the RV-MM-EMN-441 trial (NCT01091831) and achieving at least a very good partial response (VGPR) after consolidation were included in the study. Patients received 4 Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (RD) courses as induction, Cyclophosphamide to mobilize bone marrow stem cells (BMSC) and then were randomized to receive 6 cycles of Cyclophosphamide-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (CRD) or Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) with Melphalan 200 mg/m2. All patients received maintenance therapy with Lenalidomide (R) or Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (RD) until relapse. MRD analysis was performed in a single laboratory (University of Turin, Italy) using flow cytometry according to European Myeloma Network guideline (Rawstron AC, Haematologica 2008). Samples of bone marrow (BM) were collected at diagnosis, after consolidation, after 3 and 6 courses of maintenance and then every 6 months until clinical relapse. The samples were considered MRD +ve if ≥ 0.01% of PC were detected. Immunophenotypic (IF) relapse was defined as an increase of ≥ 25% in the amount of malignant plasma cells in BM compared to the previous determination. Results Fifty patients (27 female/23 male) with a median age of 57 yrs (40-65) entered the study. According to ISS, 27 patients were stage I, 15 stage II and 8 stage III. Fish risk profile was standard in 31 patients, high in 11 and not available in 8. Twenty-five patients received CRD as consolidation and 25 underwent ASCT. The median follow-up was 28.6 months. After consolidation 16 (32%) patients achieve a complete response (CR) and 34 (68%) a VGPR. MRD was negative in 19/48 (40%) patients, of which 12 received ASCT (out of 23, 52%) and 7 received CRD (out of 25, 28%). Patients receiving ASCT showed a lower value of residual cells (median 0.08%, range 0 – 1.00) compared to patients receiving CRD (median 0.5%, range 0 – 2.9%, p=0.0134). The lower MRD value was achieved after consolidation in 31 patients (62%), after 3 courses of maintenance in 6 patients (12%) and after 6 or more courses of maintenance in 13 patients (26%). The increase in quality of response was observed primarily in patients receiving CRD: the average amount of residual plasma cells in bone marrow was 71/uL after induction, lowering to 51/uL after 6 and 12 courses of maintenance therapy. Nine patients clinically relapsed after an average time of 25.6 months from the beginning of the therapy and in all patients this was anticipated by immunophenotypic relapse. Conclusion 1) consolidation therapy with ASCT determines a deeper response compared to CRD; 2) maintenance therapy can improve the quality of response, in particular in patients not receiving ASCT; 3) Immunophenotypic relapse anticipate the clinical relapse. These results suggest the possible role of MRD monitoring to better assess the response to therapy also during maintenance and as marker of early relapse. Disclosures: Ladetto: Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Palumbo:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V122.21.3126.3126

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2013

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 116, No. 21 ( 2010-11-19), p. 3019-3019

Abstract: Abstract 3019 Background: Panobinostat (LBH-589) is a pan-deacetilase inhibitor that targets histone proteins increasing tumor suppressor gene activities leading to cell-cycle and differentiation arrest besides to target non-histone proteins such as HSP90, aggressomes, p53, HIF-1a, and a-tubulin somehow promoting cell death. Panobinostat, combined with steroids and/or immunomodulatory drugs, demonstrated additive/synergistic activity in Multiple Myeloma (MM) and ability to overcome previous chemoresistance. Several combination studies with Panobinostat plus novel drugs are now ongoing in MM. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, phase I-II study exploring the combination of a standard therapy such as MPT (Melphalan 0.18 mg/kg per os for 4 days, Prednisone 1.5 mg/kg per os for 4 days, Thalidomide 50 mg/day continuously) with Panobinostat 15 mg p.o. thrice weekly for 3 weeks in a 28-day cycle to assess safety profile and activity of this combination in patients with relapsed/refractory MM having adequate performance status and haematological, cardiac, liver and neurological functions. The study was designed according to the Briant and Day method that plans a “dose-escalation phase” to determine both the MTD and the activity of the study drug and an “expansion-phase” in which the MTD of the study drug is used to further assess its safety and efficacy. Despite in the first phase of this study 19 patients were planned according to the study design, protocol was amended after 13 patients had been enrolled since more than 50% grade 3–4 toxicity occurred although response criteria were met. Therefore, Panobinostat was reduced to 10 mg p.o. thrice weekly for 3 weeks in a 28-day cycle whereas the dose of drugs of the MPT combination was not modified. Toxicity and response were assessed according to CTC version 4 and IMWG criteria, respectively. Results: As of February 2010, 24 patients were enrolled in this study. Median age was 71.5 years (range 40–81 years) and 12 patients (50%) had ISS 2–3 score. Patients had received a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1–6) and 5 (21%) three or more prior lines of therapy. Sixteen (73%), 13 (54%), 18 (75%), 11 (46%) and 9 (37.5%) patients had been previously treated with ASCT, thalidomide, bortezomib, lenalidomide and all 3 new-drugs, respectively. Seven patients (29%) were refractory to the last therapy. Twelve patients (50%) had a disease history longer than 5 years. In the first 13 patients treated with Panobinostat 15 mg, grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia occurred in 6 (46%) and 9 patients (69%), respectively. Moreover, 4 patients (31%) developed non-hematological adverse events such as fatigue, constipation, infection and arrythmia. In the group of 11 patients treated with Panobinostat 10 mg, grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia decreased to 18% (2 patients) but neutropenia was still high (8 patients: 72.5%). Three patients (27%) had grade 3–4 non-hematological toxicity (one fatigue and two constipation). No patients had QTcF prolongation or severe neuropathy. Dose adjustment was necessary in 9 patients (37.5%, all due to hematological toxicity) while 6 patients (25%) interrupted the protocol because of side effects (5 due to no resolution of grade 3–4 hematological toxicity within 4 weeks and one due to atrial fibrillation). One patient (4%) died on study due to sepsis during prolonged neutropenia. Response ≥ PR were observed in 12 patients (50%) including 4 VGPR and 8 PR. Additionally, 2 patients had MR and 8 SD. Only 2 patients progressed during treatment. There was no difference between the two cohorts of patients (Panobinostat 15 mg and Panobinostat 10 mg) in terms of response ≥ PR (54% vs 45.5%) or disease progression (7.5% vs 9%). Notably, response was obtained also in 2/7 patients (28%) who progressed during bortezomib or IMIDs. Conclusions: This study suggests that MPT-Panobinostat combination has an encouraging anti-myeloma activity since responses were still seen in patients with advanced stage or resistant to new drugs diseases. Different schedules of Panobinostat/melphalan should be explored to reduce haematological toxicity. Disclosures: Offidani: Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Panobinostat in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria. Polloni:Celgene: Honoraria. Ballanti:Celgene: Honoraria. Catarini:Celgene: Honoraria. Alesiani:Celgene: Honoraria. Corvatta:Celgene: Honoraria. Gentili:Celgene: Honoraria. Boccadoro:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Leoni:Celgene: Honoraria. Palumbo:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V116.21.3019.3019

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2010

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma and Leukemia, Elsevier BV, Vol. 10, No. 5 ( 2010-10), p. 353-360

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2152-2650

URL: Article

DOI: 10.3816/CLML.2010.n.068

Language: English

Publisher: Elsevier BV

Publication Date: 2010

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2540998-0

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2193618-3

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 124, No. 21 ( 2014-12-06), p. 197-197

Abstract: Introduction Three-drug induction regimens including a first or second generation proteasome inhibitor are a current standard of care for autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT)-eligible, newly diagnosed, multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts). In the absence of prospective randomized studies comparing different induction regimens, it is difficult to recommend one treatment over another, and the choice is ultimately based upon physician’s preference or single center’s policy. Bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) has been recently approved by EMA as induction for previously untreated, ASCT-eligible, MM pts. Bortezomib combined with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (VCD) is an attractive alternative to VTD, although efficacy results have not been backed by phase III studies. The present study aimed to evaluate the differences in response rates and toxicity between VTD and VCD induction regimens in preparation for subsequent ASCT. Methods Two hundred and thirty six pts who were randomized to the VTD arm of the GIMEMA-MMY-3006 study were compared with an equal number of pair mates who received induction therapy with VCD as part of the EMN02 trial designed to prospectively compare ASCT up front vs bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone followed by ASCT at the time of relapse or progression. Both groups of pts were treated in Italian centers participating in the two phase III studies. Case matching was performed with respect to the following pt characteristics at baseline: age (± 2 years), ISS stage (1 vs 2 vs 3), t(4;14) (detected by FISH in ≥ 10% vs 〈 10% CD138+ bone marrow plasma cells) and del(17p) (≥ 20% vs 〈 20% positivity). The two groups were also comparable with respect to Hb concentration, Plts and M protein isotype. Induction treatment consisted of three 21-day cycles of either VTD (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11; thalidomide 100 mg daily for the first 14 days and 200 mg daily thereafter; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12) or VCD (bortezomib and dexamethasone as in VTD; cyclophosphamide 500 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8). Evaluation of response and toxicity was performed after the third cycle of induction or the last cycle actually received for those pts who discontinued earlier. Results On an intention-to-treat basis, the overall rate of partial response (PR) or higher, as established according to the IMWG criteria, was 93% (95% CI: 89-96%) with VTD and 84% (CI: 79-89%) with VCD (χ2test p value=0.003). In particular, the complete response (CR) rate was approximately three fold higher for pts randomized to VTD (19%, CI: 14-24%) as compared to those in the VCD group (7%; CI: 4-10%) (p 〈 0.001), while the corresponding values for very good partial response (VGPR) were 43% (CI: 36-49%) vs 32% (CI: 26-38%), respectively (p 〈 0.001). Overall, VTD induction therapy yielded a significantly higher rate of ≥ VGPR (61%, CI: 55-68%) as compared to VCD (39%, CI: 32-45%) (p 〈 0.001), and a two fold lower probability to achieve less than PR (7%, CI: 4-11%) vs 16% (CI: 11-21%) (p=0.003). The superior rate of ≥ VGPR yielded by VTD over VCD was retained both in pts with ISS stage 2+3 (65%, CI: 57-73%) vs 37% (CI: 29-46%) (p 〈 0.001), and in those with t(4;14) and/or del(17p) [79% (CI: 68-90%) vs 44% (CI: 30-58%), p 〈 0.001]. Evaluation of toxicity induced by VTD and VCD induction therapy was focused on peripheral neuropathy (PN) (NCI CTCAE, version 3.0). Grade ≥ 2 PN was slightly higher for pts on VTD (13%, CI: 9-17%) as compared to those on VCD (9%, CI: 6-13%) (p=0.19). When the threshold of grade ≥ 3 PN was considered, the difference between the two groups significantly favoured pts treated with VCD [2% (CI: 0.1-3%) vs 7% (CI: 4-11%) (p=0.004) for pts on VTD] . However, it is worth noting that only a single pt on VCD and 2 pts on VTD discontinued treatment due to PN. Conclusions The triplet VTD induction therapy was associated with significantly higher CR and ≥ VGPR rates compared to VCD, confirming that VTD is one of the most active bortezomib-based induction regimens in preparation for ASCT. Grade ≥ 2 PN rate was similar between the two regimens, although VTD-induced grade ≥ 3 PN was higher with VTD. Data on the impact of VTD and VCD induction therapy on post-ASCT high-quality response rates and additional outcomes will be presented at the meeting. The superiority of VTD over VCD needs to be confirmed by prospective randomized studies, one of which is currently running in Europe. Disclosures Cavo: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharm.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squib: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria. Cavallo:Onyx: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Petrucci:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Ballanti:Janssen: Honoraria. Palumbo:Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array BioPharma: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sonneveld:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V124.21.197.197

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2014

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Leukemia & Lymphoma, Informa UK Limited, Vol. 53, No. 9 ( 2012-09), p. 1722-1727

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 1042-8194 , 1029-2403

URL: Article

DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2012.664844

Language: English

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

Publication Date: 2012

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2030637-4