Lenalidomide
Citations
All
Search in:AllTitleAbstractAuthor name
Publications
(1K+)
Patents
Grants
Pathways
Clinical trials
Publication
Journal: New England Journal of Medicine
May/29/2019
Abstract
Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is a standard treatment for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation. We sought to determine whether the addition of daratumumab would significantly reduce the risk of disease progression or death in this population.We randomly assigned 737 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation to receive daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (daratumumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Treatment was to continue until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable side effects. The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS
At a median follow-up of 28.0 months, disease progression or death had occurred in 240 patients (97 of 368 patients [26.4%] in the daratumumab group and 143 of 369 patients [38.8%] in the control group). The estimated percentage of patients who were alive without disease progression at 30 months was 70.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.0 to 75.4) in the daratumumab group and 55.6% (95% CI, 49.5 to 61.3) in the control group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.73; P<0.001). The percentage of patients with a complete response or better was 47.6% in the daratumumab group and 24.9% in the control group (P<0.001). A total of 24.2% of the patients in the daratumumab group, as compared with 7.3% of the patients in the control group, had results below the threshold for minimal residual disease (1 tumor cell per 105 white cells) (P<0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were neutropenia (50.0% in the daratumumab group vs. 35.3% in the control group), anemia (11.8% vs. 19.7%), lymphopenia (15.1% vs. 10.7%), and pneumonia (13.7% vs. 7.9%).

Among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation, the risk of disease progression or death was significantly lower among those who received daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone than among those who received lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone. A higher incidence of neutropenia and pneumonia was observed in the daratumumab group. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MAIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02252172.).
Publication
Journal: The Lancet
November/18/2019
Abstract
Isatuximab is a monoclonal antibody that binds a specific epitope on the human CD38 receptor and has antitumour activity via multiple mechanisms of action. In a previous phase 1b study, around 65% of patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma achieved an overall response with a combination of isatuximab with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone. The aim of this study was to determine the progression-free survival benefit of isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone compared with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.We did a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study at 102 hospitals in 24 countries in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific regions. Eligible participants were adult patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least two previous lines of treatment, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. Patients were excluded if they were refractory to previous treatment with an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to either isatuximab 10 mg/kg plus pomalidomide 4 mg plus dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged ≥75 years), or pomalidomide 4 mg plus dexamethasone 40 mg. Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified according to the number of previous lines of treatment (2-3 vs >3) and age (<75 years vs ≥75 years). Treatments were assigned based on a permuted blocked randomisation scheme with a block size of four. The isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group received isatuximab intravenously on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in the first 28-day cycle, then on days 1 and 15 in subsequent cycles. Both groups received oral pomalidomide on days 1 to 21 in each cycle, and oral or intravenous dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Dose reductions for adverse reactions were permitted for pomalidomide and dexamethasone, but not for isatuximab. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, determined by an independent response committee and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02990338.Between Jan 10, 2017, and Feb 2, 2018, we randomly assigned 307 patients to treatment: 154 to isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone, and 153 to pomalidomide-dexamethasone. At a median follow-up of 11·6 months (IQR 10·1-13·9), median progression-free survival was 11·5 months (95% CI 8·9-13·9) in the isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group versus 6·5 months (4·5-8·3) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group; hazard ratio 0·596, 95% CI 0·44-0·81; p=0·001 by stratified log-rank test. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (any grade; isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone vs pomalidomide-dexamethasone) were infusion reactions (56 [38%] vs 0), upper respiratory tract infections (43 [28%] vs 26 [17%]), and diarrhoea (39 [26%] vs 29 [20%]). Adverse events with a fatal outcome were reported in 12 patients (8%) in the isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group and 14 (9%) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group. Deaths due to treatment-related adverse events were reported for one patient (<1%) in the isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone group (sepsis) and two (1%) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group (pneumonia and urinary tract infection).The addition of isatuximab to pomalidomide-dexamethasone significantly improves progression-free survival in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Isatuximab is an important new treatment option for the management of relapsed and refractory myeloma, particularly for patients who become refractory to lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor.Sanofi. VIDEO ABSTRACT.
Publication
Journal: New England Journal of Medicine
August/21/2019
Abstract
Selinexor, a selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound that blocks exportin 1 (XPO1) and forces nuclear accumulation and activation of tumor suppressor proteins, inhibits nuclear factor κB, and reduces oncoprotein messenger RNA translation, is a potential novel treatment for myeloma that is refractory to current therapeutic options.We administered oral selinexor (80 mg) plus dexamethasone (20 mg) twice weekly to patients with myeloma who had previous exposure to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, daratumumab, and an alkylating agent and had disease refractory to at least one proteasome inhibitor, one immunomodulatory agent, and daratumumab (triple-class refractory). The primary end point was overall response, defined as a partial response or better, with response assessed by an independent review committee. Clinical benefit, defined as a minimal response or better, was a secondary end point.A total of 122 patients in the United States and Europe were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (primary analysis), and 123 were included in the safety population. The median age was 65 years, and the median number of previous regimens was 7; a total of 53% of the patients had high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. A partial response or better was observed in 26% of patients (95% confidence interval, 19 to 35), including two stringent complete responses; 39% of patients had a minimal response or better. The median duration of response was 4.4 months, median progression-free survival was 3.7 months, and median overall survival was 8.6 months. Fatigue, nausea, and decreased appetite were common and were typically grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 events were noted in up to 25% of patients, and no grade 4 events were reported). Thrombocytopenia occurred in 73% of the patients (grade 3 in 25% and grade 4 in 33%). Thrombocytopenia led to bleeding events of grade 3 or higher in 6 patients.Selinexor-dexamethasone resulted in objective treatment responses in patients with myeloma refractory to currently available therapies. (Funded by Karyopharm Therapeutics; STORM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02336815.).
Publication
Journal: The Lancet
July/19/2020
Abstract
Background: Lenalidomide and bortezomib frontline exposure has raised a growing need for novel treatments for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib in combination with daratumumab has shown substantial efficacy with tolerable safety in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma in a phase 1 study. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab versus carfilzomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.
Methods: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study, 466 patients recruited from 102 sites across North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma were randomly assigned 2:1 to carfilzomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab (KdD) or carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd). All patients received twice per week carfilzomib at 56 mg/m2 (20 mg/m2; days 1 and 2 during cycle 1). Daratumumab (8 mg/kg) was administered intravenously on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1 and at 16 mg/kg weekly for the remaining doses of the first two cycles, then every 2 weeks for four cycles (cycles 3-6), and every 4 weeks thereafter. Patients received 40 mg dexamethasone weekly (20 mg for patients ≥75 years old starting on the second week). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by intention to treat. Adverse events were assessed in the safety population. This trial (NCT03158688) is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, and is active but not recruiting.
Findings: Between June 13, 2017, and June 25, 2018, 466 patients of 569 assessed for eligibility were enrolled. After median follow-up of approximately 17 months, median progression-free survival was not reached in the KdD group versus 15·8 months in the Kd group (hazard ratio 0·63; 95% CI 0·46-0·85; p=0·0027). Median treatment duration was longer in the KdD versus the Kd group (70·1 vs 40·3 weeks). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 253 (82%) patients in the KdD group and 113 (74%) patients in the Kd group. The frequency of adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation was similar in both groups (KdD, 69 [22%]; Kd, 38 [25%]).
Interpretation: KdD significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus Kd in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and was associated with a favourable benefit-risk profile.
Funding: Amgen.
Publication
Journal: New England Journal of Medicine
September/30/2018
Abstract
Rituximab plus chemotherapy has been shown to be effective in patients with advanced-stage, previously untreated follicular lymphoma; nevertheless, most patients will have a relapse. Combination immunotherapy with lenalidomide and rituximab is an immunomodulatory regimen that has shown promising activity in patients with indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
We conducted this multicenter, international, phase 3 superiority trial to evaluate rituximab plus lenalidomide, as compared with rituximab plus chemotherapy, in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma. Patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the two regimens, followed by maintenance monotherapy with rituximab. Treatment with rituximab plus lenalidomide consisted of 18 cycles of the two drugs, followed by rituximab maintenance therapy every 8 weeks for 12 cycles (six additional doses). Treatment with rituximab plus chemotherapy consisted of the investigator's choice of one of three rituximab-based regimens, followed by maintenance monotherapy with rituximab every 8 weeks for 12 cycles. The primary end points were complete response (confirmed or unconfirmed) at 120 weeks and progression-free survival.
A total of 1030 patients were randomly assigned to receive rituximab plus lenalidomide (513 patients) or rituximab plus chemotherapy (517 patients). The rate of confirmed or unconfirmed complete response at 120 weeks was similar in the two groups: 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44 to 53) in the rituximab-lenalidomide group and 53% (95% CI, 49 to 57) in the rituximab-chemotherapy group (P=0.13). The interim 3-year rate of progression-free survival was 77% (95% CI, 72 to 80) and 78% (95% CI, 74 to 82), respectively. A higher percentage of patients in the rituximab-chemotherapy group had grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (32% vs. 50%) and febrile neutropenia of any grade (2% vs. 7%), and a higher percentage of patients in the rituximab-lenalidomide group had grade 3 or 4 cutaneous reactions (7% vs. 1%).
Among patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma, efficacy results were similar with rituximab plus lenalidomide and rituximab plus chemotherapy (with both regimens followed by rituximab maintenance therapy). The safety profile differed in the two groups. (Funded by Celgene; RELEVANCE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01476787 and NCT01650701 , and EudraCT number, 2011-002792-42 .).
Publication
Journal: American Journal of Hematology
April/23/2019
Abstract
Polyneuropathy, organomegaly, endocrinopathy, M-protein, skin changes (POEMS) syndrome is a paraneoplastic syndrome due to an underlying plasma cell neoplasm. The major criteria for the syndrome are polyradiculoneuropathy, clonal plasma cell disorder (PCD), sclerotic bone lesions, elevated vascular endothelial growth factor, and the presence of Castleman disease. Minor features include organomegaly, endocrinopathy, characteristic skin changes, papilledema, extravascular volume overload, and thrombocytosis. Diagnoses are often delayed because the syndrome is rare and can be mistaken for other neurologic disorders, most commonly chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. POEMS syndrome should be distinguished from the Castleman disease variant of POEMS syndrome, which has no clonal PCD and typically little to no peripheral neuropathy but has several of the minor diagnostic criteria for POEMS syndrome.The diagnosis of POEMS syndrome is made with three of the major criteria, two of which must include polyradiculoneuropathy and clonal PCD, and at least one of the minor criteria.Because the pathogenesis of the syndrome is not well understood, risk stratification is limited to clinical phenotype rather than specific molecular markers. Risk factors include low serum albumin, age, pleural effusion, pulmonary hypertension, and reduced eGFR.For those patients with a dominant sclerotic plasmacytoma, first line therapy is irradiation. Patients with diffuse sclerotic lesions or disseminated bone marrow involvement and for those who have progression of their disease 3 to 6 months after completing radiation therapy should receive systemic therapy. Corticosteroids are temporizing, but alkylators are the mainstay of treatment, either in the form of low dose conventional therapy or high dose with stem cell transplantation. Lenalidomide shows promise with manageable toxicity. Thalidomide and bortezomib also have activity, but their benefit needs to be weighed against their risk of exacerbating the peripheral neuropathy. Prompt recognition and institution of both supportive care measures and therapy directed against the plasma cell result in the best outcomes.
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Oncology
June/8/2020
Abstract
Background: Patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation have poor outcomes and few treatment options. Tafasitamab (MOR208) is an Fc-enhanced, humanised, anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody that has shown preclinical and single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Preclinical data suggested that tafasitamab might act synergistically with lenalidomide. We aimed to assess the antitumour activity and safety of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who were ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation.
Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study (L-MIND), patients older than 18 years with histologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, who relapsed or had refractory disease after previous treatment with one to three systemic regimens (with at least one anti-CD20 therapy), were not candidates for high-dose chemotherapy and subsequent autologous stem-cell transplantation, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had measurable disease at baseline were recruited from 35 academic and community hospitals in ten countries. Patients received coadministered intravenous tafasitamab (12 mg/kg) and oral lenalidomide (25 mg/day) for up to 12 cycles (28 days each), followed by tafasitamab monotherapy (in patients with stable disease or better) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response (centrally assessed), defined as a complete or partial response according to the 2007 International Working Group response criteria for malignant lymphoma. Antitumour activity analyses are based on all patients who received at least one dose of both tafasitamab and lenalidomide; safety analyses are based on all patients who received at least one dose of either study medication. Recruitment is complete, and the trial is in follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02399085.
Findings: Between Jan 18, 2016, and Nov 15, 2017, 156 patients were screened: 81 were enrolled and received at least one dose of either study medication, and 80 received at least one dose of both tafasitamab and lenalidomide. Median follow-up was 13·2 months (IQR 7·3-20·4) as of data cutoff on Nov 30, 2018. 48 (60%; 95% CI 48-71) of 80 patients who received tafasitamab plus lenalidomide had an objective response: 34 (43%; 32-54) had a complete response and 14 (18%; 10-28) had a partial response. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (39 [48%] of 81 patients), thrombocytopenia (14 [17%]), and febrile neutropenia (ten [12%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 41 (51%) of 81 patients. The most frequently reported serious adverse events (in two or more patients) were pneumonia (five [6%]), febrile neutropenia (five [6%]), pulmonary embolism (three [4%]), bronchitis (two [2%]), atrial fibrillation (two [2%]), and congestive cardiac failure (two [2%]).
Interpretation: Tafasitamab in combination with lenalidomide was well tolerated and resulted in a high proportion of patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation having a complete response, and might represent a new therapeutic option in this setting.
Funding: MorphoSys.
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Haematology
July/22/2019
Abstract
Lenalidomide and dexamethasone has been a standard of care in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. The addition of a third drug to the combination is likely to improve treatment efficacy. KEYNOTE-185 assessed the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide and dexamethasone with and without pembrolizumab in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma. Here, we present the results of an unplanned interim analysis done to assess the benefit-risk of the combination at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).KEYNOTE-185 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 95 medical centres across 15 countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, South Africa, Spain, UK, and USA). Transplantation-ineligible patients aged 18 years and older with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and who were treatment naive were enrolled, and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone using an interactive voice or integrated web response system. Patients received oral lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-21 and oral dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of repeated 28-day cycles, with or without intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was investigator-assessed because of early trial termination. Efficacy was analysed in all randomly assigned patients and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02579863, and it is closed for accrual.Between Jan 7, 2016, and June 9, 2017, 301 patients were randomly assigned to the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=151) or the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=150). On July 3, 2017, the FDA decided to halt the study because of the imbalance in the proportion of death between groups. At database cutoff (June 2, 2017), with a median follow-up of 6·6 months (IQR 3·4-9·6), 149 patients in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group and 145 in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group had received their assigned study drug. Median progression-free survival was not reached in either group; progression-free survival estimates at 6-months were 82·0% (95% CI 73·2-88·1) versus 85·0% (76·8-90·5; hazard ratio [HR] 1·22; 95% CI 0·67-2·22; p=0·75). Serious adverse events were reported in 81 (54%) patients in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 57 (39%) patients in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group; the most common serious adverse events were pneumonia (nine [6%]) and pyrexia (seven [5%]) in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group and pneumonia (eight [6%]) and sepsis (two [1%]) in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group. Six (4%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (cardiac arrest, cardiac failure, myocarditis, large intestine perforation, pneumonia, and pulmonary embolism) and two (1%) in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage and respiratory failure).The results from this unplanned, FDA-requested, interim analysis showed that the benefit-risk profile of pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone is unfavourable for patients with newly diagnosed, previously untreated multiple myeloma. Long-term safety and survival follow-up is ongoing.Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc (Kenilworth, NJ, USA).
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Haematology
July/22/2019
Abstract
Pomalidomide and dexamethasone is a standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma in whom bortezomib and lenalidomide treatment has failed. KEYNOTE-183 assessed efficacy and safety of pomalidomide and dexamethasone with or without pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we present the findings of an unplanned, ad-hoc interim analysis at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).KEYNOTE-183 was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 97 medical centres across 11 countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, and USA). Patients aged at least 18 years with multiple myeloma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, previously treated with at least two lines of therapy (excluding pomalidomide) and refractory to the last line were randomly assigned 1:1 to the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group or the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group via an interactive voice response or integrated web response system. Patients received oral pomalidomide 4 mg daily on days 1-21 and oral low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in 28-day cycles, with or without intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The dual primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival. Efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients and safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02576977, and it is closed for accrual.Between Jan 18, 2016, and June 7, 2017, 249 patients were randomly assigned to either the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=125) or the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (n=124). On July 3, 2017, the FDA established that risks associated with the triple combination outweighed benefits and halted the study. Median follow-up was 8·1 months (IQR 4·5-10·9). Median progression-free survival was 5·6 months (95% CI 3·7-7·5) in the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 8·4 months (5·9-not reached) in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group; progression-free survival estimates at 6 months were 48% (95% CI 37-58) versus 60% (49-69) at 6 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1·53; 95% CI 1·05-2·22; p=0·98). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 12·9-not reached) versus 15·2 months (12·7-not reached; HR 1·61; 95% CI 0·91-2·85; p=0·95); overall survival estimates at 6 months were 82% (95% CI 74-88) versus 90% (82-95). Serious adverse events occurred in 75 (63%) of 120 patients in the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 56 (46%) of 121 patients in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group. Four (3%) treatment-related deaths occurred in the pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone group (one each of unknown cause, neutropenic sepsis, myocarditis, and Stevens-Johnson syndrome); myocarditis and Stevens-Johnson syndrome were considered related to pembrolizumab. No treatment-related deaths were reported in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group.The results from this unplanned, FDA-requested, interim analysis showed that the benefit-risk profile of pembrolizumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone is unfavourable for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co (Kenilworth, NJ, USA).
Publication
Journal: Leukemia
November/13/2019
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Oncology
December/18/2018
Abstract
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 patients ineligible for transplantation. We aimed to assess lenalidomide maintenance versus observation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, including cytogenetic risk and transplantation status subgroup analyses.The Myeloma XI trial was an open-label, randomised, phase 3, adaptive design trial with three randomisation stages done at 110 National Health Service hospitals in England, Wales, and Scotland. There were three potential randomisations in the study: induction treatment (allocation by transplantation eligibility status); intensification treatment (allocation by response to induction therapy); and maintenance treatment. Here, we report the results of the randomisation to maintenance treatment. Eligible patients for maintenance randomisation were aged 18 years or older and had symptomatic or non-secretory multiple myeloma, had completed their assigned induction therapy as per protocol and had achieved at least a minimal response to protocol treatment, including lenalidomide. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 from Jan 13, 2011, to Jun 27, 2013, and 2:1 from Jun 28, 2013, to Aug 11, 2017) to lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg orally on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle) or observation, and stratified by allocated induction and intensification treatment, and centre. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival, analysed by intention to treat. Safety analysis was per protocol. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN49407852, and clinicaltrialsregister.eu, number 2009-010956-93, and has completed recruitment.Between Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 11, 2017, 1917 patients were accrued to the maintenance treatment randomisation of the trial. 1137 patients were assigned to lenalidomide maintenance and 834 patients to observation. After a median follow-up of 31 months (IQR 18-50), median progression-free survival was 39 months (95% CI 36-42) with lenalidomide and 20 months (18-22) with observation (hazard ratio [HR] 0·46 [95% CI 0·41-0·53]; p<0·0001), and 3-year overall survival was 78·6% (95% Cl 75·6-81·6) in the lenalidomide group and 75·8% (72·4-79·2) in the observation group (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·73-1·05]; p=0·15). Progression-free survival was improved with lenalidomide compared with observation across all prespecified subgroups. On prespecified subgroup analyses by transplantation status, 3-year overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients was 87·5% (95% Cl 84·3-90·7) in the lenalidomide group and 80·2% (76·0-84·4) in the observation group (HR 0·69 [95% CI 0·52-0·93]; p=0·014), and in transplantation-ineligible patients it was 66·8% (61·6-72·1) in the lenalidomide group and 69·8% (64·4-75·2) in the observation group (1·02 [0·80-1·29]; p=0·88). By cytogenetic risk group, in standard-risk patients, 3-year overall survival was 86·4% (95% CI 80·0-90·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 81·3% (74·2-86·7) in the observation group, and in high-risk patients, it was 74.9% (65·8-81·9) in the lenalidomide group compared with 63·7% (52·8-72·7) in the observation group; and in ultra-high-risk patients it was 62·9% (46·0-75·8) compared with 43·5% (22·2-63·1). Since these subgroup analyses results were not powered they should be interpreted with caution. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events for patients taking lenalidomide were haematological, including neutropenia (362 [33%] patients), thrombocytopenia (72 [7%] patients), and anaemia (42 [4%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported in 494 (45%) of 1097 patients receiving lenalidomide compared with 150 (17%) of 874 patients on observation. The most common serious adverse events were infections in both the lenalidomide group and the observation group. 460 deaths occurred during maintenance treatment, 234 (21%) in the lenalidomide group and 226 (27%) in the observation group, and no deaths in the lenalidomide group were deemed treatment related.Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide significantly improved progression-free survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma compared with observation, but did not improve overall survival in the intention-to-treat analysis of the whole trial population. The manageable safety profile of this drug and the encouraging results in subgroup analyses of patients across all cytogenetic risk groups support further investigation of maintenance lenalidomide in this setting.Cancer Research UK, Celgene, Amgen, Merck, and Myeloma UK.
Publication
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology
March/21/2019
Abstract
Patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma typically respond well to first-line immunochemotherapy. At relapse, single-agent rituximab is commonly administered. Data suggest the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide could increase the activity of rituximab.A phase III, multicenter, randomized trial of lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab was conducted in patients with relapsed and/or refractory follicular or marginal zone lymphoma. Patients received lenalidomide or placebo for 12 cycles plus rituximab once per week for 4 weeks in cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2 through 5. The primary end point was progression-free survival per independent radiology review.

RESULTS
A total of 358 patients were randomly assigned to lenalidomide plus rituximab (n = 178) or placebo plus rituximab (n = 180). Infections (63% v 49%), neutropenia (58% v 23%), and cutaneous reactions (32% v 12%) were more common with lenalidomide plus rituximab. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (50% v 13%) and leukopenia (7% v 2%) were higher with lenalidomide plus rituximab; no other grade 3 or 4 adverse event differed by 5% or more between groups. Progression-free survival was significantly improved for lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab, with a hazard ratio of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.62; P < .001) and median duration of 39.4 months (95% CI, 22.9 months to not reached) versus 14.1 months (95% CI, 11.4 to 16.7 months), respectively.

Lenalidomide improved efficacy of rituximab in patients with recurrent indolent lymphoma, with an acceptable safety profile.
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Oncology
May/17/2019
Abstract
As lenalidomide becomes increasingly established for upfront treatment of multiple myeloma, patients refractory to this drug represent a population with an unmet need. The combination of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone has shown promising results in phase 1/2 trials of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of this triplet regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide.

METHODS
We did a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial at 133 hospitals and research centres in 21 countries. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of multiple myeloma and measurable disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, who received one to three previous regimens, including a lenalidomide-containing regimen for at least two consecutive cycles. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to bortezomib and dexamethasone with or without pomalidomide using a permutated blocked design in blocks of four, stratified according to age, number of previous regimens, and concentration of β2 microglobulin at screening. Bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2) was administered intravenously until protocol amendment 1 then either intravenously or subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for the first eight cycles and subsequently on days 1 and 8. Dexamethasone (20 mg [10 mg if age >75 years]) was administered orally on the same days as bortezomib and the day after. Patients allocated pomalidomide received 4 mg orally on days 1-14. Treatment cycles were every 21 days. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, as assessed by an independent review committee. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01734928; patients are no longer being enrolled.

Between Jan 7, 2013, and May 15, 2017, 559 patients were enrolled. 281 patients were assigned pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 278 were allocated bortezomib and dexamethasone. Median follow-up was 15·9 months (IQR 9·9-21·7). Pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone significantly improved progression-free survival compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone (median 11·20 months [95% CI 9·66-13·73] vs 7·10 months [5·88-8·48]; hazard ratio 0·61, 95% CI 0·49-0·77; p<0·0001). 278 patients received at least one dose of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 270 patients received at least one dose of bortezomib and dexamethasone, and these patients were included in safety assessments. The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (116 [42%] of 278 patients vs 23 [9%] of 270 patients; nine [3%] vs no patients had febrile neutropenia), infections (86 [31%] vs 48 [18%]), and thrombocytopenia (76 [27%] vs 79 [29%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 159 (57%) of 278 patients versus 114 (42%) of 270 patients. Eight deaths were related to treatment; six (2%) were recorded in patients who received pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (pneumonia [n=2], unknown cause [n=2], cardiac arrest [n=1], cardiorespiratory arrest [n=1]) and two (1%) were reported in patients who received bortezomib and dexamethasone (pneumonia [n=1], hepatic encephalopathy [n=1]).Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide had significantly improved progression-free survival when treated with pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone. Adverse events accorded with the individual profiles of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. This study supports use of pomalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone as a treatment option in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who previously received lenalidomide.Celgene.
Publication
Journal: Frontiers in Immunology
December/3/2018
Abstract
The treatment of cancer, especially of various types of solid tumors, has been revolutionized by the blockade of the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway by immune checkpoint inhibitors. Their success amongst hematologic malignancies, however, has been limited so far to the treatment of classic Hodgkin's lymphoma, which portrays a typical overexpression of PD-1 ligands (PD-L1, PD-L2) as a consequence of changes in chromosome 9p24.1. Their current application in multiple myeloma (MM) is rather uncertain, as discordant results have been reported by distinct research groups concerning especially the expression of PD-1/PD-L1 molecules on malignant plasma cells or on the responsible immune effector cell populations, respectively. In MM it seems that an approach based on combination treatment might be appropriate as unsatisfactory results have been yielded by monotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Immunomodulatory drugs, which are the current cornerstone of MM treatment, are the most logical partners as they possess many possibly synergistic effects. Nevertheless, the initially optimistic results have become disappointing due to the excessive and unpredictable toxicity of the combination of pembrolizumab with lenalidomide or pomalidomide. The FDA has suspended or put on hold several phase 3 trials in relapsed as well as in newly diagnosed myeloma patients. There are also other potentially synergistic and promising combinations, such as the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody daratumumab, irradiation, etc. Not only the effective partner but also the correct timing of the initiation of the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors treatment seems to be of utmost importance. These strategies are currently being examined in various stages of myeloma such as during consolidation post autologous stem cell transplantation, targeting minimal residual disease or even in high risk smoldering myeloma.
Publication
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology
November/26/2019
Abstract
Assessing measurable residual disease (MRD) has become standard with many tumors, but the clinical meaning of MRD in multiple myeloma (MM) remains uncertain, particularly when assessed by next-generation flow (NGF) cytometry. Thus, we aimed to determine the applicability and sensitivity of the flow MRD-negative criterion defined by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG).

PATIENTS AND METHODS
In the PETHEMA/GEM2012MENOS65 trial, 458 patients with newly diagnosed MM had longitudinal assessment of MRD after six induction cycles with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD), autologous transplantation, and two consolidation courses with VRD. MRD was assessed in 1,100 bone marrow samples from 397 patients; the 61 patients without MRD data discontinued treatment during induction and were considered MRD positive for intent-to-treat analysis. The median limit of detection achieved by NGF was 2.9 × 10-6. Patients received maintenance (lenalidomide ± ixazomib) according to the companion PETHEMA/GEM2014MAIN trial.

RESULTS
Overall, 205 (45%) of 458 patients had undetectable MRD after consolidation, and only 14 of them (7%) have experienced progression thus far; seven of these 14 displayed extraosseous plasmacytomas at diagnosis and/or relapse. Using time-dependent analysis, patients with undetectable MRD had an 82% reduction in the risk of progression or death (hazard ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.30; P < .001) and an 88% reduction in the risk of death (hazard ratio, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.29; P < .001). Timing of undetectable MRD (after induction v intensification) had no impact on patient survival. Attaining undetectable MRD overcame poor prognostic features at diagnosis, including high-risk cytogenetics. By contrast, patients with Revised International Staging System III status and positive MRD had dismal progression-free and overall survivals (median, 14 and 17 months, respectively). Maintenance increased the rate of undetectable MRD by 17%.

The IMWG flow MRD-negative response criterion is highly applicable and sensitive to evaluate treatment efficacy in MM.
Publication
Journal: Blood
May/22/2019
Abstract
Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have limited treatment options and poor survival outcomes. The increasing adoption of lenalidomide-based therapy for frontline treatment of multiple myeloma has resulted in a need for effective regimens for lenalidomide-refractory patients. This phase 1b study evaluated daratumumab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone (D-Kd) in patients with RRMM after 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory drug; lenalidomide-refractory patients were eligible. Carfilzomib- and daratumumab-naïve patients (n = 85) received carfilzomib weekly on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (20 mg/m2 initial dose, escalated to 70 mg/m2 thereafter) and dexamethasone (40 mg/wk). Of these, 10 patients received the first daratumumab dose as a single infusion (16 mg/kg, day 1 cycle 1), and 75 patients received a split first dose (8 mg/kg, days 1-2 cycle 1). Subsequent dosing was per the approved schedule for daratumumab. Patients received a median of 2 (range, 1-4) prior lines of therapy; 60% were lenalidomide refractory. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (31%), lymphopenia (24%), anemia (21%), and neutropenia (21%). Infusion-related reactions were observed in 60% and 43% of single and split first-dose patients, respectively. Overall response rate was 84% (79% in lenalidomide-refractory patients). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached; 12-month PFS rates were 74% for all treated patients and 65% for lenalidomide-refractory patients. D-Kd was well tolerated with low neutropenia rates, and it demonstrated deep responses and encouraging PFS, including in patients refractory to lenalidomide. The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01998971.
Publication
Journal: Annals of Oncology
January/30/2019
Abstract
Primary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSLs) are mainly diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs) of the non-germinal center B-cell (non-GCB) subtype. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of rituximab plus lenalidomide (R2) in DLBCL-PCNSL.Patients with refractory/relapsed (R/R) DLBCL-PCNSL or primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL) were included in this prospective phase II study. The induction treatment consisted of eight 28-day cycles of R2 (rituximab 375/m2 i.v. D1; lenalidomide 20 mg/day, D1-21 for cycle 1; and 25 mg/day, D1-21 for the subsequent cycles); in responding patients, the induction treatment was followed by a maintenance phase comprising 12 28-day cycles of lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day, D1-21). The primary end point was the overall response rate (ORR) at the end of induction (P0 = 10%; P1 = 30%).Fifty patients were included. Forty-five patients (PCNSL, N = 34; PVRL, N = 11) were assessable for response. The ORR at the end of induction was 35.6% (95% CI 21.9-51.2) in assessable patients and 32.0% (95% CI 21.9-51.2) in the intent-to-treat analysis, including 13 complete responses (CR)/unconfirmed CR (uCR; 29%) and 3 partial responses (PR; 7%). The best responses were 18 CR/uCR (40%) and 12 PR (27%) during the induction phase. The maintenance phase was started and completed by 18 and 5 patients, respectively. With a median follow-up of 19.2 months (range 1.5-31), the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 7.8 months (95% CI 3.9-11.3) and 17.7 months (95% CI 12.9 to not reached), respectively. No unexpected toxicity was observed. The peripheral baseline CD4/CD8 ratio impacted PFS [median PFS = 9.5 months (95% CI, 8.1-14.8] for CD4/CD8 ≥ 1.6; median PFS = 2.8 months, [95% CI, 1.1-7.8) for CD4/CD8 < 1.6, P = 0.03).The R2 regimen showed significant activity in R/R PCNSL and PVRL patients. These results support assessments of the efficacy of R2 combined with methotrexate-based chemotherapy as a first-line treatment of PCNSL.NCT01956695.
Publication
Journal: Blood
January/23/2019
Abstract
The heterogeneous nature of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) demands a complex and personalized variety of therapeutic approaches. Among them, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains the only potentially curative option and is accessible to only a small number of fit patients. For the majority of patients with MDS, treatment strategies are nonintensive and risk-adapted (by the revised version of the International Prognostic Scoring System), ranging from iron chelation and growth factors to lenalidomide and hypomethylating agents. These approaches are noncurative and aimed instead at improving cytopenias and quality of life and delaying disease progression. These limitations underpin the need for more translational research-based clinical trials in well-defined subgroups of patients with MDS. Indeed, much progress has been made over the past decade in understanding the complex molecular mechanisms underlying MDS. Unfortunately, this has not yet translated into approval of novel treatment options. There is a particularly urgent medical need in patients failing current first-line therapies, such as with erythropoiesis-stimulating or hypomethylating agents. Nevertheless, actual developments are expected to pave the way for exciting novel therapeutic opportunities. This review provides an overview of the current therapeutic landscape in MDS focusing on recent advances in clinical and translational research.
Publication
Journal: Blood
September/5/2019
Abstract
Achieving and maintaining high-quality response is the treatment goal for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The phase 3 PETHEMA/GEM2012 study, in 458 patients {less than or equal to} 65 years old with NDMM, is evaluating bortezomib (subcutaneous) + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (VRD) for 6 cycles followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) conditioned with intravenous busulfan + melphalan vs melphalan and posttransplant consolidation with 2 cycles of VRD. We present grouped response analysis of induction, transplant, and consolidation. Responses deepened over time; in patients who initiated cycle 6 of induction (n = 426), the {greater than or equal to} very good partial response rates were 55.6% by cycle 3, 63.8% by cycle 4, 68.3% by cycle 5, and 70.4% after induction. The complete response rate of 33.4% after induction in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, which was similar in the 92 patients with high-risk cytogenetics (34.8%), also deepened with further treatment (44.1% after ASCT and 50.2% after consolidation). Rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (median 3 × 10-6 sensitivity) in the ITT population also increased from induction (28.8%) to transplant (42.1%) and consolidation (45.2%). The most common grade {greater than or equal to} 3 treatment-emergent adverse events during induction were neutropenia (12.9%) and infection (9.2%). Grade {greater than or equal to} 2 peripheral neuropathy (grouped term) during induction was 17.0%, with a low frequency of grade 3 (3.7%) and grade 4 (0.2%) events. VRD is an effective and well-tolerated regimen for induction in NDMM with deepening response throughout induction and over the course of treatment. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01916252) and EudraCT (2012-005683-10).
Publication
Journal: Leukemia
April/17/2019
Abstract
Monitoring tumour burden and therapeutic response through analyses of circulating cell-free tumour DNA (ctDNA) and extracellular RNA (exRNA) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients were performed in a Phase Ib trial of 24 relapsed/refractory patients receiving oral azacitidine in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Mutational characterisation of paired BM and PL samples at study entry identified that patients with a higher number of mutations or a higher mutational fractional abundance in PL had significantly shorter overall survival (OS) (p = 0.005 and p = 0.018, respectively). A decrease in ctDNA levels at day 5 of cycle 1 of treatment (C1D5) correlated with superior progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.017). Evaluation of exRNA transcripts of candidate biomarkers indicated that high CRBN levels coupled with low levels of SPARC at baseline were associated with shorter OS (p = 0.000003). IKZF1 fold-change <0.05 at C1D5 was associated with shorter PFS (p = 0.0051) and OS (p = 0.0001). Furthermore, patients with high baseline CRBN coupled with low fold-change at C1D5 were at the highest risk of progression (p = 0.0001). In conclusion, this exploratory analysis has provided the first demonstration in MM of ctDNA for predicting disease outcome and of the utility of exRNA as a biomarker of therapeutic response.
Publication
Journal: Journal of Clinical Oncology
October/25/2019
Abstract
Observation is the current standard of care for smoldering multiple myeloma. We hypothesized that early intervention with lenalidomide could delay progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma.We conducted a randomized trial that assessed the efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide compared with observation in patients with intermediate- or high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Lenalidomide was administered orally at a dose of 25 mg on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival, with disease progression requiring the development of end-organ damage attributable to multiple myeloma and biochemical progression.

RESULTS
One hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned-92 patients to the lenalidomide arm and 90 to the observation arm. Median follow-up is 35 months. Response to therapy was observed in 50% (95% CI, 39% to 61%) of patients in the lenalidomide arm, with no responses in the observation arm. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide compared with observation (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.62; P = .002). One-, 2-, and 3-year progression-free survival was 98%, 93%, and 91% for the lenalidomide arm versus 89%, 76%, and 66% for the observation arm, respectively. Only six deaths have been reported, two in the lenalidomide arm versus four in the observation arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.53). Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic adverse events occurred in 25 patients (28%) on lenalidomide.

Early intervention with lenalidomide in smoldering multiple myeloma significantly delays progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma and the development of end-organ damage.
Publication
Journal: The Lancet Haematology
August/13/2018
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Regimens based on ibrutinib alone and lenalidomide and rituximab in combination show high activity in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma. We hypothesised that the combination of all three drugs would improve efficacy compared with previously published data on either regimen alone.
METHODS
In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma who had previously been treated with at least one rituximab-containing regimen, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-3, and at least one site of measurable disease, and who met criteria for several laboratory-assessed parameters. Treatment was divided into an induction phase of 12 cycles of 28 days with all three drugs and a maintenance phase with ibrutinib and rituximab only (cycle duration 56 days), given until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In the induction phase, patients received intravenous (375 mg/m2) or subcutaneous (1400 mg) rituximab once a week during cycle 1 and then once every 8 weeks. Oral ibrutinib (560 mg once a day) was given to patients every day in the cycle, whereas oral lenalidomide (15 mg once a day) was given on days 1-21. The primary endpoint was overall response assessed in the intention-to-treat population according to Lugano criteria. Safety analysis included all patients who received the treatment, irrespective of eligibility or duration of treatment. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer accruing patients, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02460276.
RESULTS
Between April 30, 2015, and June 1, 2016, we enrolled 50 patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma at ten centres in Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark. At a median follow-up of 17·8 months (IQR 14·7-20·9), 38 (76%, 95% CI 63-86) patients had an overall response, including 28 (56%, 42-69) patients who had a complete response and ten (20%, 11-33) who had a partial response. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 19 [38%] of 50 patients), infections (in 11 [22%] patients), and cutaneous toxicity (in seven [14%] patients). There were three treatment-related deaths during the study, two due to sepsis and one due to embolic stroke.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results provide preliminary evidence that the triplet combination of ibrutinib, lenalidomide, and rituximab is an active regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma, and should be evaluated in a prospective randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND
Janssen and Celgene.
Publication
Journal: Blood
July/23/2019
Abstract
The outcome of patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is poor, particularly in patients ineligible for stem cell transplantation or who fail induction therapy or salvage therapy. The phase 1b portion of this open-label, dose-escalation (3+3+3 design) study examined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary safety and activity of the regimen in transplant-ineligible adults with histologically confirmed relapsed/refractory DLBCL after at least 1 prior therapy. Patients received once-daily 560 mg ibrutinib, 375 mg/m2 intravenous rituximab day 1 of cycles 1 to 6, and 10, 15, 20, or 25 mg lenalidomide days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle. Forty-five patients were treated; median time since diagnosis was 14.1 months, and 51% of the patients had non-germinal center B-cell-like (non-GCB) DLBCL, 33% had transformed DLBCL, 60% were refractory, and 27% were primary refractory. Because of dose-limiting toxicities, a de-escalation cohort (10 mg lenalidomide) was initiated, and with subsequent re-escalation up to 25 mg lenalidomide, the MTD was not reached. In response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 44% (complete response [CR], 28%); among them, the ORR was 65% (CR, 41%) in non-GCB and 69% and 56% in relapsed (n = 16) and secondary refractory (n = 27) disease, respectively. Overall and for non-GCB, median response duration was 15.9 months, with 2 patients receiving therapy beyond 3 years. Phase 2 was initiated with 20 mg lenalidomide in relapsed/refractory non-GCB, whereas the phase 1b 25-mg lenalidomide cohort was being completed; an additional 25-mg cohort in phase 2 is currently ongoing. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02077166.
Publication
Journal: Blood
March/13/2019
Abstract
This phase 1b dose-escalation study evaluated isatuximab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Patients who had received ≥2 prior MM therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor (PI), were enrolled and received isatuximab at 5, 10, or 20 mg/kg (weekly for 4 weeks, followed by every 2 weeks), pomalidomide 4 mg (days 1-21), and dexamethasone 40 mg (weekly) in 28-day cycles until progression/intolerable toxicity. The primary objective was to determine the safety and recommended dose of isatuximab with this combination. Secondary objectives included evaluation of pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and efficacy. Forty-five patients received isatuximab (5 [n = 8], 10 [n = 31], or 20 [n = 6] mg/kg). Patients received a median of 3 (range, 1-10) prior lines; most were refractory to their last regimen (91%), with 82% lenalidomide-refractory and 84% PI-refractory. Median treatment duration was 9.6 months; 19 patients (42%) remain on treatment. Most common adverse events included fatigue (62%), and upper respiratory tract infection (42%), infusion reactions (42%), and dyspnea (40%). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse event was pneumonia, which occurred in 8 patients (17.8%). Hematologic laboratory abnormalities were common (lymphopenia, leukopenia, anemia, 98% each; neutropenia, 93%; and thrombocytopenia, 84%). Overall response rate was 62%; median duration of response was 18.7 months; median progression-free survival was 17.6 months. These results demonstrate potential meaningful clinical activity and a manageable safety profile of isatuximab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone in heavily pretreated patients with RRMM. The 10 mg/kg weekly/every 2 weeks isatuximab dose was selected for future studies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02283775.
load more...