Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

In: Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 12, No. 3 ( 2012-9), p. 165-171

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 1591-8890 , 1591-9528

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1007/s10238-011-0157-2

Language: English

Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Publication Date: 2012

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2054398-0

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 37, No. 15_suppl ( 2019-05-20), p. 8002-8002

Abstract: 8002 Background: High and comparable rates of MRD negativity were seen in NDMM pts after 4 28-day induction cycles with KRd followed by ASCT and 4 KRd consolidation (KRd_ASCT_KRd) and after 12 KRd cycles (KRd12), showing the superiority of both regimens over KCd induction-ASCT-KCd consolidation (KCd-ASCT-KCd) (Gay F ASH 2018). Here we evaluated the benefit of KRd_ASCT_KRd vs KRd12 in specific subgroups of pts. Methods: 474 NDMM pts ≤65 years were randomized to KRd_ASCT_KRd or KRd12 or KCd_ASCT_KCd. We compared rate of ≥VGPR, ≥CR, sCR, MRD negativity (centralized, second generation flow cytometry, sensitivity 10 -5 ) after consolidation with KRd_ASCT_KRd vs KRd12 in patients with R-ISS 1 and R-ISS 2/3. Since high-risk pts may sometimes respond rapidly, but then relapse early, we also analyzed the rate of early relapse ( 〈 18 months from randomization). We performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to evaluate factors predictive of early relapse. Results: Median follow-up was 25 months. Rates of ≥VGPR, ≥CR, sCR, MRD negativity were comparable between KRd_ASCT_KRd and KRd12 overall, in pts with R-ISS Stage 1 and with R-ISS Stage 2/3 (Table). A significantly lower number of pts experienced early relapse with KRd_ASCT_KRd vs KRd12 (12 pts [8%] vs 26 pts [17%] ; P=0.015). This difference was mainly related to a significantly lower rate of early relapse in R-ISS Stage 2/3 pts receiving KRd_ASCT_KRd vs KRd12 (11 pts [12%] vs 22 pts [23%] ; P=0.05); no difference was seen in R-ISS 1 (0 vs 2 pts). In multivariate regression analysis, KRd_ASCT_KRd vs KRd12 reduced the risk of early progression (OR 0.42; P=0.021); R-ISS Stage 2 (OR 3.6; P=0.001) and R-ISS Stage 3 (OR 4.85; P=0.003) increased the risk compared with R-ISS 1. Conclusions: KRd-ASCT-KRd and KRd12 were equally effective in inducing high-quality responses, with about 50% of high-risk pts achieving MRD negativity. In high-risk pts ASCT reduced the risk of early relapse. Clinical trial information: NCT02203643. [Table: see text]

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.8002

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Publication Date: 2019

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5

In: Leukemia & Lymphoma, Informa UK Limited, Vol. 56, No. 5 ( 2015-05-04), p. 1510-1513

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 1042-8194 , 1029-2403

URL: Article

DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2014.982644

Language: English

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

Publication Date: 2015

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2030637-4

In: New England Journal of Medicine, Massachusetts Medical Society, Vol. 339, No. 17 ( 1998-10-22), p. 1186-1193

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0028-4793 , 1533-4406

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199810223391702

Language: English

Publisher: Massachusetts Medical Society

Publication Date: 1998

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468837-2

In: Blood Cancer Journal, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 10, No. 5 ( 2020-05-18)

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2044-5385

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1038/s41408-020-0326-1

Language: English

Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Publication Date: 2020

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2600560-8

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 136, No. Supplement 1 ( 2020-11-5), p. 13-14

Abstract: Background. High-dose melphalan followed by autologous stem cell transplantation is a standard of care in transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients and is also an option at relapse. Therefore, since the minimum number of CD34+ cells required to ensure adequate bone marrow recovery after myeloablative chemotherapy is 2x10^6/kg, an adequate upfront stem-cell collection is necessary in MM patients. Approximately 5-15% of MM patients mobilized with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) or G-CSF+cyclophosphamide (G-CSF/CY) fail stem-cell collection ( & lt;2x10^6/kg CD34+). Plerixafor in combination with G-CSF or G-CSF/CY increases stem-cell yield and lowers the rate of poor mobilizers (PM). Here we present preliminary results of the prospective, observational MOZOBL06877 study (partially supported by Sanofi investigation funds) to evaluate the performance of stem-cell mobilization with G-CSF/CY plus on-demand plerixafor in NDMM patients treated with novel agents. Methods. NDMM patients undergoing stem-cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide (2-4 g/m2) and G-CSF (5-10 mcg/kg/day), with on-demand plerixafor according to clinical practice ( & lt;20 CD34+/ul on first count day or & lt;1×106 CD34+ cells/kg collected on first apheresis day), could be enrolled and were observed for 30 days after mobilization. The primary endpoint was the PM rate (patients collecting & lt;2×106 CD34+ cells/kg); secondary endpoints were the number of patients requiring plerixafor, the stem-cell yields with or without plerixafor, the identification of predictive factors for the use of plerixafor and adverse events (AEs) during study treatment. Results. At the data cut-off (09 June 2020), a total of 252 patients had been enrolled: of these, 192 patients (59, 29-72 years) were available for the analysis. The median number of induction cycles before mobilization was 4 (range 1-7); median time from diagnosis to mobilization was 6 months (IQR 5-8). Induction therapy consisted of a bortezomib-based regimen in 171 (90%), carfilzomib/lenalidomide-based regimen in 14 (7%), lenalidomide-based regimen in 3 patients (2%). 187/192 (97%) patients successfully collected ≥2 x 10^6/Kg CD34: of these, 153/192 (80%) collected with G-CSF/CY, 29/192 (15%) required the administration of plerixafor. The PM rate was 5/192 (2.5%): of these, 3/5 did not receive plerixafor in addition to G-CSF/CY, while 2/5 failed stem-cell collection despite the use of plerixafor. The median number of CD34 collected was 9.8x10^6/Kg (6.7-14.2). The median number of CD34/Kg collected with or without plerixafor was 5.1 (4.3-9.1) and 10.6 (8.1-14.4), respectively. The median number of apheresis days was 1 (IQR 1-2), with a stem-cell collection efficiency (CD34 number collected/ days of apheresis) equal to 7.7 x10^6 CD34/kg/day. The median number of apheresis days was 1 without plerixafor and 2 with plerixafor, with a stem-cell collection efficiency (CD34 number collected/ days of apheresis) equal to 8.8 without plerixafor and 3 with plerixafor. In patients who received plerixafor, the median number of CD34/ul pre-apheresis was 16 (10-19.5); after the administration of plerixafor, the median number of CD34/ul pre-apheresis increased to 46 (21-81). Non hematological AEs within 30 days after mobilization occurred in 8% of patients (grade 3-4: 2%); all grade and grade 3-4 infections occurred in 2% of patients each. In a multivariate analysis, main factors predicting the use of plerixafor were ISS 3 (vs. 1, OR 4.43; p=0.008), bone marrow plasma cells at diagnosis & gt;60% (OR 3.85; p=0.006), white blood cell (WBC) count pre-mobilization (OR 6.66; p & lt;0.001) and lenalidomide-based therapy (OR 3.85; p=0.03). Conclusion. "On-demand" plerixafor combined with G-CSF/CY is a safe and effective rescue strategy for stem-cell collection in MM, reducing the PM rate to 2.5%. Extensive bone marrow plasmacytosis, ISS 3 disease at diagnosis, use of lenalidomide during induction and a low WBC count pre-mobilization predicted the use of plerixafor. Thus, pre-emptive administration of plerixafor in patients presenting one or more risk factors for poor mobilization might help in further reducing the PM rate. Disclosures Mina: Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lemoli:AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BerGenBio ASA: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Offidani:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Musto:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Corradini:F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and accommodations paid by for; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and accommodations paid by for; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and accommodations paid by for; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and accommodations paid by for; KiowaKirin: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; BMS: Other; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and accommodations paid by for; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cavo:BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel accomodations, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel accomodations, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Honoraria. Boccadoro:GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Larocca:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: The presentation includes discussion of off-label use of a drug or drugs for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (including cyclophosphamide, G-CSF and plerixafor).

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2020-136316

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2020

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 125-125

Abstract: Introduction: The phase 3 GIMEMA-MMY-3006 trial comparing bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) versus thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) as induction therapy before, and consolidation after, double autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) provided the first demonstration of increased CR rate, the primary study endpoint, and prolonged PFS with VTD (Cavo M et al, Lancet 2010). However, updating trial results with longer follow-up than earlier reported is needed to assess the effects of treatment interventions on OS and to identify factors predicting for favorable long term outcomes. Aims: We performed a post-hoc analysis of that study to evaluate long term results and construct a prognostic index of survival. Methods: 474 patients were enrolled, 236 randomized to VTD and 238 to TD. Median follow-up for surviving patients was 124 months (IQR: 117-131). Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Semi-parametric Cox regression analysis was used to construct the prognostic index. To assess the evolution of prognosis over time, conditional survival CS(t|s) estimate for PFS was calculated as the probability of surviving without progression a further 2 (t) years (yrs) after having already survived s yrs. Results: Estimates of PFS and OS at 10 yrs for the VTD arm were 34% (HR=0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77; p 〈 0.001) and 60% (HR=0.68, 95% CI=0.51-0.90; p=0.007), respectively, compared with TD (corresponding values, 17% and 46%), representing a 38-32% reduction in the risk of progression and death with VTD. Outcome benefits with VTD were seen for patients with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities (HCRA), including t(4;14) and/or del(17p) by FISH, (PFS: 17% vs 3% at 10 yrs, HR=0.45, 95% CI=0.30-0.69; p 〈 0.001; OS: 42% vs 22% at 10 yrs, HR=0.54, 95% CI=0.34-0.88; p=0.011) and lacking HRCA (PFS: 40% vs 20%, HR=0.60, 95% CI=0.46-0.79; p 〈 0.001; OS: 67% vs 52%, HR=0.66, 95% CI=0.46-0.95; p=0.025). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, randomization to VTD predicted for both prolonged PFS (HR=0.60, 95% CI=0.48-0.76; p 〈 0.001) and OS (HR=0.68, 95% CI=0.50-0.91; p=0.010). Specific multivariate regression analysis not including therapy revealed that the leading factors adversely affecting PFS were the presence of HRCA (HR=1.86, 95% CI=1.45-2.38; p 〈 0.001), ISS stage II+III (HR=1.38, 95% CI=1.10-1.74; p=0.006), and failure to achieve CR as time-dependent variable (HR=2.01, 95% CI=1.59-2.53; p 〈 0.001). The three variables were used to build a scoring system that stratified patients into three risk groups with divergent clinical outcomes: low-risk (LR) (22%, none of the 3 adverse variables), intermediate-risk (IR) (39%, 1 adverse variable), and high-risk (HR) (39%, 2 or 3 adverse variables). Estimated 10-yr PFS rates were 44% for patients in LR, 28% for IR, and 9% for HR (p 〈 0.001). Estimated 10-yr OS rates were 76%, 58%, and 32%, respectively (p 〈 0.001). Consensually, the prognostic score identified three groups with statistically different PFS and OS within the TD and VTD arm (p 〈 0.001). On VTD, the 10-yr PFS and OS rates were 51% and 79% for LR, 41% and 62% for IR, 13% and 43% for HR, respectively. Randomization to receive VTD was associated with longer PFS for the IR (41% vs 15% at 10 yrs, HR=0.50, 95% CI=0.34-0.73; p 〈 0.001) and HR (13% vs 7% at 10 yrs, HR=0.66, 95% CI=0.47-0.92; p=0.015) subgroups compared with TD. Moreover, HR patients assigned to VTD had significantly longer OS in comparison with the same group of patients on TD (43% vs 23% at 10 yrs, HR=0.65, 95% CI=0.43-0.97; p=0.033). Assessment of conditional survival revealed that the probability of surviving without progression a further 2 yrs improved progressively after 36 months, being 65% and reaching the 91% at 96 months (p value for trend=0.009). The conditional PFS became superimposable after 78 months for the LR and IR (87% and 86%, respectively), while resulted significantly lower in the HR (62.5%) (p=0.008). Conclusions: With a follow up of 10 yrs, the final analysis of the GYMEMA MMY-3006 trial comparing VTD versus TD showed a persistent PFS benefit translating into extended OS for the VTD arm. A prognostic model based on cytogenetic, ISS stage and achievement of CR, identified three risk groups with statistically different long-term survival probabilities. Both IR and HR groups significantly benefited from VTD. A PFS time of 78 months predicted for long term survival outcomes in the LR and IR groups. Disclosures Tacchetti: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Di Raimondo:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Zamagni:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bringhen:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Consultancy. Offidani:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Montefusco:Celgene: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Other: Advisory Board. Cavo:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2018-99-116716

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2018

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 128, No. 22 ( 2016-12-02), p. 3336-3336

Abstract: Cardio-vascular (CV) events are common in patients (pts) with myeloma (MM) and may occur as a result of age-related comorbidities, the disease itself or as a complication of anti-MM treatment, including proteasome inhibitors.Carfilzomib is a novel second generation proteasome inhibitorapproved as a single agent and in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed MM. Here, we present the results of an integrated CV safety analysis of 148 newly diagnosed, elderly or transplant-ineligible pts enrolled in 3 phase I/II studies with the combination of Carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone(IST-CAR-506, IST-CAR-561, IST-CAR-601).In all trials cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 was administered orally on days 1, 8, 15 and dexamethasone 40 mg was administered orally once weekly. Carfilzomib was administered intravenously at the dose of 36 mg/m2 on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 in the IST-CAR-506 trial; at 3 dose levels escalated from 45 to 70 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 in the IST-CAR-561 trial and on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 in the IST-CAR-601 trial. In all studies, after completing 9 28-day cycles, pts received 28-day maintenance cycles with Carfilzomib until disease progression or intolerance. Adverse events (AEs) were graded based on NCI-CTCAE v4. Median age was 72 years (range 55-85), 38 pts (26%) were older than 75 years. The median follow-up was 21 months. Overall, any grade CV AEs were reported in 62 pts (42%): 40/110 pts (36%) younger than 75 years and 22/38 (58%) older than 75 years (p=0.02). The more frequent events were hypertension, aggregated cardiac failure events, thromboembolic events and arrhythmia (Table 1). Grade ≥ 3 events occurred in 29 pts (30%): 17/110 pts (15%) younger than 75 years and 13/38 (34%) older than that (p=0.01). Aggregated cardiac failure events of any grade were reported in 10 pts (7%), thromboembolic events in 5 pts (3%), hypertension in 4 pts (3%) and arrhythmia 2 pts (1%). In pts younger than 75 years, the most frequent grade ≥ 3 AEs were hypertension (10 patients, 9%) and dyspnea (11 patients, 10%). In pts older than 75 years, the most frequent grade ≥ 3 AEs were hypertension and pulmonary edema (5 pts each, 13%). Importantly, 34% of pts who experienced CV AEs had hypertension at baseline or developed it during treatment compared to 14% of pts who did not experience CV AEs. Diabetes was more frequent (33%) in pts older than 75 years who developed CV AEs compared to 10% of pts older than 75 years who did not report any CV AEs or those younger than 75 years. No difference was observed among different doses or different schedules of Carfilzomib. Among pts who developed a CV AE, one third had a Carfilzomib dose reduction or discontinuation (Table 1) compared to 12-18% of pts who did not experience CV toxicity (p 〈 0.0001). Overall, the risk of CV toxicity was lower during maintenance: 21 pts of 97 who started maintenance (22%) developed any grade CV events. This improvement was evident only in pts younger than 75 years: 11/75 patients younger than 75 years (15%) had CV events compared to 10/22 (45%) older than 75 years (Figure 1). The most frequent CV AE during maintenance was hypertension (12%), regardless of age. Only 5 pts (5%) reduced Carfilzomib dose during maintenance. Five (3%) CV-related deaths were documented: 4 during induction and 1 during maintenance. All of them were possibly related to Carfilzomib (atrial fibrillation, heart failure, cardiac arrest, sudden death, pulmonary embolism). The occurrence of any CV AE during induction increased the mortality for any cause by twofold, regardless of age: the 2-year overall survival was 70% in patients who experienced CV AE and 82% in those who did not (HR 2.01, 95% CI 0.99-4.07, p=0.04). The risk of CV AEs during treatment with Carfilzomib is significantly higher in pts older than 75 years and the most important risk factor, regardless of age, is hypertension. Developing CV toxicity increases the need for dose reduction or drug discontinuation with a negative impact on overall survival. Elderly pts should be carefully assessed before starting treatment with 24 hour blood pressure monitoring. During treatment, baseline vital signs should be recorded and medications of blood pressure should be targeted promptly to keep blood pressure below 140/80 mmHg. With these simple actions, these AEs may be prevented or managed proactively and pts can derive maximum benefit from their treatment with Carfilzomib. Disclosures Bringhen: Mundipharma: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; Amgen: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Other: ADVISORY BOARD. Petrucci:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Caravita di Toritto:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Ria:BMS: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau; Binding Site: Speakers Bureau. Cavo:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Foà:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genetech: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Corradini:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gentium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Gaidano:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria. Palumbo:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Takeda: Employment, Honoraria. Sonneveld:Celgene: Other: Advisory board, Research Funding; Millennium: Other: Advisory board, Research Funding; Onyx: Other: Advisory board, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Advisory board, Research Funding. Boccadoro:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; SANOFI: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbivie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; CELGENE: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V128.22.3336.3336

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2016

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 120, No. 21 ( 2012-11-16), p. 2971-2971

Abstract: Abstract 2971 Introduction: Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent approved for the treatment of several lymphoproliferative disorders. Studies have evidenced its efficacy in multiple myeloma (MM), but data so far available in this setting are scarce. We performed a retrospective analysis of Italian patients with relapsed/refractory MM, who had received bendamustine as salvage therapy within a national compassionate use program. Patients and methods: Seventy-eight patients (42 males, 36 females) were collected in 19 hematological centers. Mean age was 64.2 years (range 38–84). ISS was equally distributed, with about one third of patents being represented in single stages. Twenty-three of 43 analyzed patients had cytogenetic abnormalities, the most frequent being del13q (14 patients); t(4;14) and t(11;14) were observed in 4 and 2 patients, respectively, while t(6;14), del17p or complex karyotype occurred in single patients. The median number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range 1–10). Ninety-seven percent of patients had previously received bortezomib, 94% IMIDs, 85% melphalan, 74% cyclophosphamide, 45% anthracyclines, 26% other drugs, 33% radiotherapy. Sixty percent of patients had undergone autologous and 4% allogeneic stem cell transplantation. The last treatment before bendamustine was a bortezomib-based regimen in 31%, an IMIDs-based regimen in 42%, a combined bortezomib/IMIDs-based regimen in 9%, while 18% of patients had received other therapies. Seventy-three percent of patients were resistant to last therapy received, while 27% had relapsed. Median duration of response to last treatment received before bendamustine was 9 months (range 2–46). Median Hb value was 10.1 g/dl (range 7.6–14.9), WBC count 2.700/μl (range 550–15.200), PLT count 130.000/μl (range 6.000–410.000). Serum creatinine, calcium, beta2-microglobulin and LDH levels were increased in 12 (15%), 4 (5%), and 44 (56%) patients, respectively, while albumin levels were decreased in 27 patients (35%). The median percentage of marrow plasma cells (as evaluated in 57 cases) was 60% (range 1–100). Seventy-six percent of patients had osteolytic bone involvement and 78% extramedullary localizations, with 13% showing secondary plasma cell leukemia and 7% documented amyloidosis or proteinuria. Finally, 45% of patients presented with at least one severe comorbidity, mainly cardio-vascular, liver or pulmonary dysfunction, and diabetes. Results: A total of 236 cycles was administered (median 3, range 1–9). In 47% of patients bendamustine was variously associated to bortezomib (23%), or IMIDs (21%), or to a combination of both (3%). In 80% of patients receiving bendamustine +/− steroids, a median dose of 90 mg/sqm for two consecutive days every 28 days was employed; the median dose was 80 mg/sqm when bendamustine was combined with bortezomib, 60 mg/sqm with IMIDs (total range: 40–140 mg/sqm). The remaining patients received single, monthly doses ranging from 60 to 150 mg/sqm. According to IMWG uniform response criteria, 21 out of 73 evaluable patients achieved a response after a median time of 3 months. In particular, there were 16 PR, 1 VGPR, 1 sCR, and 3 CR; overall response rate (ORR) was, therefore, 29%. Response rate was 10% (4/39) in bendamustine single agent +/− steroids, 38% (5/13) in bendamustine + bortezomib and 62% (10/16) in bendamustine + IMIDs subgroups, respectively. Responders had received a lower number of previous treatments than non responders (median 3 vs 4). Response rate was higher in relapsed (12/21, 57%) than in resistant patients (10/57, 17%). The time to best response ranged from 1 to 8 months. After a median follow-up of 8 months, median PFS duration was 6 months, with 13 out of 21 responding patients not yet progressed. Median OS of the entire cohort was 6.2 months (7 months in responders and 4 months in non responders, range 0–27). Grade 3–4 hematological and non-hematological toxicities occurred in 56% and 15% of patients, respectively, causing three interruptions of the treatment. Conclusions: Though with the clear limits due to the high heterogeneity of treatments applied and of population analyzed, our data indicate that bendamustine may be a therapeutic option in heavily pretreated MM, suggesting a possible non cross-resistance with other agents. Its earlier use with appropriate doses and combinations might further improve the results obtained in this study. Disclosures: Musto: Mundipharma: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Bendamustine in relapsed/refractory myeloma. Fragasso:Mundipharma: Honoraria. Baldini:Mundipharma: Honoraria. Storti:Mundipharma: Honoraria.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V120.21.2971.2971

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2012

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