Lenalidomide maintenance versus observation for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (Myeloma XI): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jackson GH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6318225 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Lenalidomide maintenance versus observation for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (Myeloma XI): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.
Jackson Graham H GH Davies Faith E FE Pawlyn Charlotte C Cairns David A DA Striha Alina A Collett Corinne C Hockaday Anna A Jones John R JR Kishore Bhuvan B Garg Mamta M Williams Cathy D CD Karunanithi Kamaraj K Lindsay Jindriska J Jenner Matthew W MW Cook Gordon G Russell Nigel H NH Kaiser Martin F MF Drayson Mark T MT Owen Roger G RG Gregory Walter M WM Morgan Gareth J GJ
The Lancet. Oncology 20181214 1
<h4>Background</h4>Patients with multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide maintenance therapy have improved progression-free survival, primarily following autologous stem-cell transplantation. A beneficial effect of lenalidomide maintenance therapy on overall survival in this setting has been inconsistent between individual studies. Minimal data are available on the effect of maintenance lenalidomide in more aggressive disease states, such as patients with cytogenetic high-risk disease or pati ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Lenalidomide is an effective maintenance agent for patients with myeloma, prolonging first remission and, in transplant eligible patients, improving overall survival (OS) compared to observation. The 'Myeloma XI' trial, for newly diagnosed patients, aimed to evaluate whether the addition of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat to the lenalidomide maintenance backbone could improve outcomes further. Patients included in this analysis were randomised to maintenance therapy with lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle), or in combination with vorinostat (300 mg/day on day 1-7 and 15-21 of each 28-day cycle) with treatment continuing until unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. There was no significant difference in median progression-free survival between those receiving lenalidomide-vorinostat or lenalidomide alone, 34 and 40 months respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.44, p = 0.109). There was also no significant difference in median OS, not estimable and 75 months respectively (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76-1.29, p = 0.929). Subgroup analysis demonstrated no statistically significant heterogeneity in outcomes. Combination lenalidomide-vorinostat appeared to be poorly tolerated with more dose modifications, fewer cycles of maintenance therapy delivered and higher rates of discontinuation due to toxicity than lenalidomide alone. The trial did not meet its primary end-point, there was no benefit from the addition of vorinostat to lenalidomide maintenance.
| S-EPMC10952726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCarfilzomib is a second-generation irreversible proteasome inhibitor that is efficacious in the treatment of myeloma and carries less risk of peripheral neuropathy than first-generation proteasome inhibitors, making it more amenable to combination therapy.Methods and findingsThe Myeloma XI+ trial recruited patients from 88 sites across the UK between 5 December 2013 and 20 April 2016. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma eligible for transplantation were randomly assigned to receive the combination carfilzomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (KRdc) or a triplet of lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (Rdc) or thalidomide, dexamethasone, and cyclophosphamide (Tdc). All patients were planned to receive an autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) prior to a randomisation between lenalidomide maintenance and observation. Eligible patients were aged over 18 years and had symptomatic myeloma. The co-primary endpoints for the study were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for KRdc versus the Tdc/Rdc control group by intention to treat. PFS, response, and safety outcomes are reported following a planned interim analysis. The trial is registered (ISRCTN49407852) and has completed recruitment. In total, 1,056 patients (median age 61 years, range 33 to 75, 39.1% female) underwent induction randomisation to KRdc (n = 526) or control (Tdc/Rdc, n = 530). After a median follow-up of 34.5 months, KRdc was associated with a significantly longer PFS than the triplet control group (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.76). The median PFS for patients receiving KRdc is not yet estimable, versus 36.2 months for the triplet control group (p < 0.001). Improved PFS was consistent across subgroups of patients including those with genetically high-risk disease. At the end of induction, the percentage of patients achieving at least a very good partial response was 82.3% in the KRdc group versus 58.9% in the control group (odds ratio 4.35, 95% CI 3.19-5.94, p < 0.001). Minimal residual disease negativity (cutoff 4 × 10-5 bone marrow leucocytes) was achieved in 55% of patients tested in the KRdc group at the end of induction, increasing to 75% of those tested after ASCT. The most common adverse events were haematological, with a low incidence of cardiac events. The trial continues to follow up patients to the co-primary endpoint of OS and for planned long-term follow-up analysis. Limitations of the study include a lack of blinding to treatment regimen and that the triplet control regimen did not include a proteasome inhibitor for all patients, which would be considered a current standard of care in many parts of the world.ConclusionsThe KRdc combination was well tolerated and was associated with both an increased percentage of patients achieving at least a very good partial response and a significant PFS benefit compared to immunomodulatory-agent-based triplet therapy.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ISRCTN49407852.
| S-EPMC7799846 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7043012 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEarly trials of long-term lenalidomide use reported an increased incidence of second primary malignancy (SPM), including acute myeloid leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndrome. Later, meta-analysis suggested the link to be secondary to lenalidomide in combination with melphalan.MethodsMyeloma XI is a large, phase III randomised trial in-which lenalidomide was used at induction and maintenance, in transplant eligible (TE) and non-eligible (TNE) newly diagnosed patients (NCT01554852). Here we present an analysis of SPM incidence and profile the SPM type to determine the impact of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and lenalidomide exposure in 4358 patients treated on study. Data collection took place from the start of the trial in May 2010, to May 2019, as per the protocol timeline. The Median follow-up following maintenance randomisation was 54.5 and 46.1 months for TE and TNE patients, respectively.FindingsIn the TE pathway, the overall SPM incidence was 7.7% in lenalidomide maintenance patients compared to 3.2% in those being observed (p = 0.006). Although the TNE lenalidomide maintenance patients had the greatest SPM incidence (15.4%), this was not statistically significant when compared to the observed patients (10%, p = 0.10).The SPM incidence was higher in patients who received lenalidomide at induction and maintenance (double exposure), when compared to those treated with lenalidomide at one time point (single exposure). Again, this was most marked in TNE patients where the overall SPM incidence was 16.9% in double exposed patients, compared to 11.7% in single exposed patients, and 11.2% in patients who did not receive lenalidomide (p = 0.04). This is likely an effect of treatment duration, with the median number of cycles being 27 in the TNE double exposed patients, vs 6 in the single exposure patients.Haematological SPMs were uncommon, diagnosed in 50 patients (incidence 1.1%). The majority of cases were diagnosed in TE patients treated with lenalidomide maintenance (n = 25, incidence 2.8%), suggesting a possible link with melphalan. Non-melanoma skin cancer incidence was highest in patients receiving lenalidomide maintenance, particularly in TNE patients, where squamous cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma were diagnosed in 5.5% and 2.6% of patients, respectively. The incidence of most solid tumour types was higher in lenalidomide maintenance patients.Mortality due to progressive myeloma was reduced in patients receiving lenalidomide maintenance, noted to be 16.6% compared 22.6% in those observed in TE patients and 32.7% compared to 41.5% in TNE patients. SPM related mortality was low, 1.8% and 6.1% in TE and TNE lenalidomide maintenance patients, respectively, compared to 0.4% and 2.8% in those being observed.InterpretationThis provides reassurance that long-term lenalidomide treatment is safe and associated with improved outcomes in TE and TNE populations, although monitoring for SPM development should be incorporated into clinic review processes.FundingPrimary financial support was from Cancer Research UK [C1298/A10410].
| S-EPMC10404862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:: We conducted a pooled analysis of two phase III trials, RV-MM-EMN-441 and EMN01, to compare maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone vs. lenalidomide in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible and -ineligible myeloma patients. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival, progression-free survival 2 and overall survival with both regimens. A secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of duration of maintenance on overall survival and on outcome after relapse. A total of 625 patients (lenalidomide-prednisone arm, n = 315; lenalidomide arm, n = 310) were analyzed. The median follow-up was 58 months. Median progression-free survival (25 vs. 19 months; p = 0.08), progression-free survival 2 (56 vs. 49 months; p = 0.9) and overall survival (73 months vs. NR; p = 0.08) were not significantly different between the two arms. Toxicity profiles of lenalidomide-prednisone and lenalidomide were similar, with the exception of neutropenia that was higher in the lenalidomide arm (grade ≥ 3: 9% vs. 19%, p < 0.001), without an increase in the rate of infections. Overall survival (median NR vs. 49 months, p < 0.001), progression-free survival from relapse (median 35 vs. 24 months, p = 0.004) and overall survival from relapse (median not reached vs. 41 months, p = 0.002) were significantly longer in patients continuing maintenance for ≥2 years. We showed that the addition of prednisone at 25 or 50 mg every other day (eod) to lenalidomide maintenance did not induce any significant advantage.
| S-EPMC6896192 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHigh-dose dexamethasone is a mainstay of therapy for multiple myeloma. We studied whether low-dose dexamethasone in combination with lenalidomide is non-inferior to and has lower toxicity than high-dose dexamethasone plus lenalidomide.MethodsPatients with untreated symptomatic myeloma were randomly assigned in this open-label non-inferiority trial to lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-21 plus dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20 of a 28-day cycle (high dose), or lenalidomide given on the same schedule with dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle (low dose). After four cycles, patients could discontinue therapy to pursue stem-cell transplantation or continue treatment until disease progression. The primary endpoint was response rate after four cycles assessed with European Group for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant criteria. The non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 15% in response rate. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00098475.Findings445 patients were randomly assigned: 223 to high-dose and 222 to low-dose regimens. 169 (79%) of 214 patients receiving high-dose therapy and 142 (68%) of 205 patients on low-dose therapy had complete or partial response within four cycles (odds ratio 1.75, 80% CI 1.30-2.32; p=0.008). However, at the second interim analysis at 1 year, overall survival was 96% (95% CI 94-99) in the low-dose dexamethasone group compared with 87% (82-92) in the high-dose group (p=0.0002). As a result, the trial was stopped and patients on high-dose therapy were crossed over to low-dose therapy. 117 patients (52%) on the high-dose regimen had grade three or worse toxic effects in the first 4 months, compared with 76 (35%) of the 220 on the low-dose regimen for whom toxicity data were available (p=0.0001), 12 of 222 on high dose and one of 220 on low-dose dexamethasone died in the first 4 months (p=0.003). The three most common grade three or higher toxicities were deep-vein thrombosis, 57 (26%) of 223 versus 27 (12%) of 220 (p=0.0003); infections including pneumonia, 35 (16%) of 223 versus 20 (9%) of 220 (p=0.04), and fatigue 33 (15%) of 223 versus 20 (9%) of 220 (p=0.08), respectively.InterpretationLenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone is associated with better short-term overall survival and with lower toxicity than lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma.FundingNational Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
| S-EPMC3042271 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The safety and efficacy of siltuximab (CNTO 328) was tested in combination with lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (RVD) in patients with newly-diagnosed, previously untreated symptomatic multiple myeloma. Fourteen patients were enrolled in the study, eleven of whom qualified to receive therapy. A majority of patients (81.8%) completed the minimal number or more of the four required cycles, while two patients completed only three cycles. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of siltuximab with RVD was dose level -1 (siltuximab: 8.3 mg/kg; bortezomib: 1.3 mg/m(2); lenalidomide: 25 mg; dexamethasone: 20 mg). Serious adverse events were grade 3 pneumonia and grade 4 thrombocytopenia, and no deaths occurred during the study or with follow-up (median follow-up 28.1 months). An overall response rate, after 3-4 cycles of therapy, of 90.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 58.7%, 99.8%) (9.1% complete response (95% CI: 0.2%, 41.3%), 45.5% very good partial response (95% CI: 16.7%, 76.6%) and 36.4% partial response (95% CI: 10.9%, 69.2%)) was seen. Two patients withdrew consent, and nine patients (81.8%) opted for autologous stem cell transplantation.
| S-EPMC4771967 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose Lenalidomide maintenance therapy after autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) demonstrated prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo or observation in several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). All studies had PFS as the primary end point, and none were powered for overall survival (OS) as a primary end point. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to better understand the impact of lenalidomide maintenance in this setting. Patients and Methods The meta-analysis was conducted using primary-source patient-level data and documentation from three RCTs (Cancer and Leukemia Group B 100104, Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell'Adulto RV-MM-PI-209, and Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome 2005-02) that met the following prespecified inclusion criteria: an RCT in patients with NDMM receiving ASCT followed by lenalidomide maintenance versus placebo or observation with patient-level data available and achieved database lock for primary efficacy analysis. Results Overall, 1,208 patients were included in the meta-analysis (605 patients in the lenalidomide maintenance group and 603 in the placebo or observation group). The median PFS was 52.8 months for the lenalidomide group and 23.5 months for the placebo or observation group (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.55). At a median follow-up time of 79.5 months for all surviving patients, the median OS had not been reached for the lenalidomide maintenance group, whereas it was 86.0 months for the placebo or observation group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.90; P = .001). The cumulative incidence rate of a second primary malignancy before disease progression was higher with lenalidomide maintenance versus placebo or observation, whereas the cumulative incidence rates of progression, death, or death as a result of myeloma were all higher with placebo or observation versus lenalidomide maintenance. Conclusion This meta-analysis demonstrates a significant OS benefit and confirms the PFS benefit with lenalidomide maintenance after ASCT in patients with NDMM when compared with placebo or observation.
| S-EPMC5652871 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10445424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:On February 22, 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval for the use of lenalidomide as maintenance therapy after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) for patients with multiple myeloma. The approval was based on evidence from two randomized, blinded trials of maintenance lenalidomide versus placebo in patients with myeloma who had undergone auto-HSCT along with a third trial of lenalidomide versus no therapy. Each of the trials demonstrated superior progression-free survival for the patients treated with lenalidomide. The effect on overall survival was mixed, with one trial showing longer overall survival and another showing no effect. Subgroup analysis suggested better results for patients with International Staging System stage I or II disease compared with stage III disease. Safety evaluation did not reveal any new safety concerns. More second primary malignancies were observed in the lenalidomide arm compared with the placebo arm. The FDA concluded that lenalidomide maintenance showed a favorable benefit-to-risk ratio when used as maintenance therapy after auto-HSCT. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:Prior to this approval, there were no U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved maintenance therapies for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who have undergone autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT). Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide after auto-HSCT in patients with MM demonstrated an approximately 15- to 18-month advantage in progression-free survival compared with placebo at the time of the primary analysis. Patients treated with lenalidomide also appeared to have a survival advantage compared with patients treated with placebo. Because of the high rate of relapse of MM in patients following auto-HSCT and because MM is a serious and often fatal disease, these results appear to be clinically meaningful.
| S-EPMC6067941 | biostudies-literature