Dataset Information

Maintenance Therapy With Immunomodulatory Drugs in Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors have dramatically changed management of multiple myeloma (MM). While MM remains incurable, consolidation and maintenance therapy aimed at improving duration of response can potentially improve survival outcomes. A majority of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated benefit of IMiD-based maintenance therapy in delaying disease progression; however, whether this therapy can lead to improved survival remains controversial.

Methods

PubMed and abstract databases of major hematology and/or oncology meetings were searched for RCTs that studied maintenance therapy with IMiDs in MM. A meta-analysis was conducted to systematically evaluate the impact of IMiD-based maintenance therapy on survival outcomes and serious adverse events associated with the therapy. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

Eighteen phase 3 RCTs enrolling 7730 patients were included. IMiD-based maintenance therapy statistically significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.57 to 0.67, P < .001) but failed to improve overall survival (OS; HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.01, P = .082). Stratified analyses demonstrated that both thalidomide and lenalidomide provided PFS but not OS benefit in transplantation as well as nontransplantation settings. IMiD-based maintenance therapy in MM led to a higher risk of grade 3-4 thromboembolism (risk ratio = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.41 to 4.52, P = .002). Thalidomide maintenance therapy increased the risk of peripheral neuropathy; lenalidomide maintenance therapy increased the risks of myelosuppression and second primary hematological malignancies.

Conclusions

Thalidomide- or lenalidomide-based maintenance therapy improves PFS but not OS in MM and increases risks of grade 3-4 adverse events, including thromboembolism, peripheral neuropathy, neutropenia, and infection.

SUBMITTER: Wang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6280981 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Immunomodulatory drugs (thalidomide, lenalidomide and pomalidomide; IMID) are widely used in the treatment of multiple myeloma patients. To date, few data are available on IMID adherence in multiple myeloma patients. The aim of our study was to evaluate IMID adherence and to compare two indirect methods to measure IMID adherence in multiple myeloma patients: a specific questionnaire and the medication possession ratio (MPR). Another aim was to explore this specific questionnaire for the assessment of IMID adherence in multiple myeloma patients. METHODS:All consecutive multiple myeloma patients, with at least two consecutive dispensations of thalidomide, lenalidomide or pomalidomide in our hospital were included in this prospective study. IMID adherence was measured using a specific questionnaire and the medication possession ratio. Relationship between the questionnaire scores and variables of interest was evaluated by multiple linear regression with a robust variance estimator. FINDINGS:Sixty-three patients were included in our study. The mean questionnaire score was 8.2±1.2 and the mean medication possession ratio value was 0.97±0.06. A total of 76% of patients were considered adherent according to the questionnaire (i.e. score ≥ 8), 94% according to the medication possession ratio (i.e. MPR ≥ 0.90), and 70% according to the questionnaire and the medication possession ratio. No statistically significant linear association was observed between the questionnaire score and any variables of interest including medication possession ratio. All Cronbach's alpha were relatively low (range 0.0342-0.2443), showing a low correlation of the different questions with the questionnaire score. CONCLUSIONS:Our study is the first prospective study evaluating IMID adherence in multiple myeloma patients in real life. The high adherence to IMIDs reported here, regardless of the drug, is encouraging considering the efficacy, toxicity and elevated cost of IMIDs. The specific questionnaire should be used with caution to evaluate IMID adherence.

Project description:Importance:Several trials demonstrated the impact of novel agent-based maintenance in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), but there is no current evidence demonstrating the superiority of one regimen over the other, owing to the lack of direct/indirect comparisons. Objective:To analyze and compare the effectiveness of different maintenance regimens in NDMM via a network meta-analysis. Data Sources:We performed 2 independent searches in PubMed and Cochrane databases, and then we identified all the records registered after 1999 and on or before November 20, 2017. Study Selection:By blinded review, we identified prospective phase 3 randomized trials evaluating novel agent-based maintenance in patients with NDMM; the included studies compared at least 2 maintenance approaches; comparators included placebo and no maintenance. From 364 screened records, 11 studies were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis:We followed (independent extraction) the guidelines provided by the PRISMA Report and the EQUATOR Network. The evidence was synthesized using a network meta-analysis (NMA). To allow comparison of all treatments, no maintenance was selected as common comparator and the effect of placebo was assumed to be the same as no treatment. The best option was identified by a Bayesian consistency model based on hazard ratio (HR), 95% credible interval (CrI), probability of being the best treatment (PbBT), and median ranking distribution (MedR). Main Outcomes and Measures:Outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results:Eleven trials and 8 treatments including a total of 5073 participants were included. By PFS analysis, lenalidomide-based regimens (lenalidomide-prednisone, lenalidomide alone) were identified as the most effective options (HR, 0.39 [95% CrI, 0.28-0.53] and 0.47 [95% CrI, 0.39-0.55], respectively; MedR, 1 and 2; overall PbBT, 74%). Four treatments (thalidomide-interferon, thalidomide-bortezomib, bortezomib-prednisone, thalidomide alone) showed an HR in favor of maintenance. By OS analysis, lenalidomide alone was identified as the best option (HR, 0.76; 95% CrI, 0.51-1.16; MedR, 2; PbBT, 38%), followed by bortezomib-thalidomide and bortezomib-prednisone. Similar features were noticed in the restricted network including transplant trials, in the sensitivity analysis, and in most of the prognostic subgroups. Conclusions and Relevance:Based on PFS and OS results of this NMA, lenalidomide maintenance appears to be the best treatment option, by synthesizing the available evidence of novel agent-based maintenance in the past 20 years.