Abiraterone increases survival in metastatic prostate cancer

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 11:06
Display Headline
Abiraterone increases survival in metastatic prostate cancer

Biosynthesis of extragonadal androgen may contribute to the progression of castration-resistant prostate cancer. Abiraterone acetate is a selective
inhibitor of androgen biosynthesis that acts by inhibiting cytochrome P450 c17, a critical enzyme in testosterone synthesis, and thereby inhibiting androgen synthesis by the adrenal glands and testis and within the prostate tumor. In 2011, abiraterone was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in combination with prednisone for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have received previous chemotherapy containing docetaxel.1,2

*For PDFs of the full Community Translations article and accompanying Commentary, click on the links to the left of this introduction.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Legacy Keywords
abiraterone, prostate cancer, androgen biosynthesis,
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Article PDF
Article PDF

Biosynthesis of extragonadal androgen may contribute to the progression of castration-resistant prostate cancer. Abiraterone acetate is a selective
inhibitor of androgen biosynthesis that acts by inhibiting cytochrome P450 c17, a critical enzyme in testosterone synthesis, and thereby inhibiting androgen synthesis by the adrenal glands and testis and within the prostate tumor. In 2011, abiraterone was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in combination with prednisone for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have received previous chemotherapy containing docetaxel.1,2

*For PDFs of the full Community Translations article and accompanying Commentary, click on the links to the left of this introduction.

Biosynthesis of extragonadal androgen may contribute to the progression of castration-resistant prostate cancer. Abiraterone acetate is a selective
inhibitor of androgen biosynthesis that acts by inhibiting cytochrome P450 c17, a critical enzyme in testosterone synthesis, and thereby inhibiting androgen synthesis by the adrenal glands and testis and within the prostate tumor. In 2011, abiraterone was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in combination with prednisone for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have received previous chemotherapy containing docetaxel.1,2

*For PDFs of the full Community Translations article and accompanying Commentary, click on the links to the left of this introduction.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Abiraterone increases survival in metastatic prostate cancer
Display Headline
Abiraterone increases survival in metastatic prostate cancer
Legacy Keywords
abiraterone, prostate cancer, androgen biosynthesis,
Legacy Keywords
abiraterone, prostate cancer, androgen biosynthesis,
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Update on romiplostim therapy for immune thrombocytopenic purpura

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 11:03
Display Headline
Update on romiplostim therapy for immune thrombocytopenic purpura
Thrombopoietin mimetic is superior to standard of care in adults with immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and demonstrates activity and tolerability in pediatric ITP patients

Romiplostim (Nplate) is a thrombopoietin receptor agonist that is currently indicated for the treatment of thrombocytopenia in patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) who have had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. In a recently reported phase III trial,1 romiplostim treatment was associated with a number of benefits compared with the standard of care in nonsplenectomized ITP patients: higher platelet response rate, lower rates of treatment failure and splenectomy, fewer bleeding events, and fewer blood transfusions.

The safety and efficacy of romiplostim in children with ITP have not yet been established. A recently reported placebo-controlled trial indicates good response and good tolerability of romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP.2

Romiplostim versus standard of care in adult nonsplenectomized patients

In a 52-week, multicenter, openlabel trial,1 patients with ITP who had not undergone splenectomy, had received at least one prior treatment for ITP, and had a platelet count of less than 50 × 109/L were randomized to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim (n = 157) or standard-ofcare treatment (n = 77). Romiplostim was started at a dose of 3 μg/kg, which could be increased up to a maximum of 10 μg/kg to achieve a target platelet count of 50–200 × 109/L. Standardof- care treatment was selected by the treating physician based on standard institutional practices or therapeutic guidelines. Throughout the study, patients in either treatment group could receive additional therapies for ITP, including short-term rescue therapy, such as IV immune globulin (IVIG), but excluding other thrombopoietin mimetics, as deemed medically necessary by investigators.

Study population, endpoints, other treatments

The median ages of patients in the romiplostim and standard-of-care groups were 58 and 57 years, respectively; 54% and 60% were women; the median duration since ITP diagnosis was 2.1 and 2.3 years; baseline median platelet counts were 33 × 109/L and 27 × 109/L; and 13% and 6% were receiving medications, primarily glucocorticoids (11% and 3%), for ITP at baseline. Splenectomy could be performed if study therapy was considered to be ineffective or was associated with severe side effects.

The primary endpoints of the trial were the incidence of splenectomy and the incidence of treatment failure, with treatment failure defined as a platelet count of 20 × 109/L or lower for 4 consecutive weeks, a major bleeding event, or a requirement for a change in therapy (including splenectomy) due to an adverse event or bleeding. In primary endpoint analyses, patients who received any study treatment and then discontinued study participation were counted as having both treatment failure and splenectomy.

During the study, ITP treatments other than romiplostim were received by 44% of patients in the romiplostim group and 79% of patients in the standard- of-care group, including glucocorticoids in 37% versus 63%, IVIG in 7% versus 33%, rituximab (Rituxan) in 1% versus 20%, azathioprine in 1% versus 9%, danazol in 2% versus 7%, other medications in 6% versus 19%, and platelet transfusions in 6% versus 16%.

Efficacy

The incidence of treatment failure was 11% in the romiplostim group versus 30% in the standard-of-care group (P < 0.001). Time to treatment failure was significantly prolonged in the romiplostim group (Figure 1a). The incidence of splenectomy was 9% in the romiplostim group versus 36% in the standard-of-care group (P < 0.001), and time to splenectomy was significantly prolonged in the include bleeding, thrombosis, hematologic cancer or myelodysplastic syndromes, and increased bone marrow reticulin.

After adjustment for duration of study-drug exposure, the romiplostim group had significantly fewer incidences of overall bleeding (P = 0.001) and grade 3 or higher bleeding (P = 0.02); no significant difference between the two treatment groups was observed for less severe bleeding. Overall, 260 bleeding events occurred in 80 patients (52%) in the romiplostim group, for a bleeding rate of 3.56 events/100 patient-weeks; 153 events occurred in 40 patients (53%) in the standard-of-care group, for a rate of 5.02 events/100 patient-weeks. Eight grade 3 or higher bleeding events occurred in five romiplostim-treated patients (3%), a rate of 0.11 events/100 patient weeks; 10 events occurred in five patients (7%) in the standard-ofcare group, a rate of 0.33 events/100 patient-weeks.

A total of 41 blood transfusions were given to 12 patients (8%) in the romiplostim group, whereas a total of 76 transfusions were given to 13 patients (17%) in the standard-of-care group. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the occurrence of thrombotic events. A total of 11 thrombotic events occurred in six patients (4%) in the romiplostim group, yielding a rate of 0.15 events/100 patientweeks, whereas two events occurred in two patients (3%) in the standardof- care group, yielding a rate of 0.07 events/100 patient-weeks.

 

 

Two cases of hematologic cancer were observed, consisting of lymphoma and myelodysplastic syndrome in one patient each in the standard-ofcare group. Bone marrow reticulin was found in one romiplostim-treated patient during 6 months posttreatment follow up, with the level being within the normal range (grade 2).

Thrombopoietin mimetics challenge the conventional wisdom about controlling ITP

Chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) affects 60,000 adults in the United States and is associated with the risk of life-threatening hemorrhage. For decades, the standard treatments included glucocorticoids and splenectomy. The advent and subsequent regulatory approval of the thrombopoietin mimetics romiplostim (Nplate) and eltrombopag (Promacta) have not only added to the therapeutic arsenal for this orphan disease but also successfully challenged the conventional wisdom that the key to controlling ITP is to reduce platelet destruction. Instead, these agents work by increasing intramedullary platelet production and are thus able to outpace the rate of peripheral destruction.

As reported by Kuter and colleagues last November in The New England Journal of Medicine, romiplostim is safe, well tolerated, and highly effective in the adult population with chronic ITP, including individuals with an intact spleen. Among the remaining questions regarding its use are: Where in the sequence of treatments for ITP do thrombopoietin mimetics belong? What is the long-term safety of these agents, given the changes to the bone marrow microenvironment that they induce? And, what will the cost impact be of a treatment that is designed for disease maintenance as opposed to providing a cure.

Thrombopoietin mimetics have not been widely tested for the treatment of pediatric ITP. Two small trials have shown that in children with disease that has been refractory to all standard approaches (with the exception of splenectomy), romiplostim is well tolerated, effective, and results in a meaningful reduction of clinically significant bleeding episodes. These data are preliminary but nevertheless provocative, and they offer the potential for new hope to children with chronic refractory ITP. Additional experience will be required to prove long-term safety and tolerability in the pediatric population before these new agents will be adopted into standard practice.

— David M.J. Hoffman, MD, FACP
Tower Hematology Oncology Medical Group
Beverly Hills, CA

Three deaths occurred during the study treatment period, including one death due to pneumonia in one romiplostim-treated patient and two deaths due to hepatic failure and cardiorespiratory arrest, respectively, in two patients in the standard-of-care group. Three additional deaths due to metastatic lung cancer, left ventricular failure, and hepatic neoplasm occurred in the standard-of-care group during the 6-month posttreatment follow up. None of the deaths was attributed to study treatment. No neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim or thrombopoietin were detected.

Quality of life

Quality of life was assessed by the ITP Patient Assessment Questionnaire, consisting of 44 ITP-specific items on each of 10 scales ranging from 0 to 100 points each (with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Scores on two scales (Women’s Reproductive Health and Work Quality of Life) could not be assessed due to inadequacies of the statistical model used in the analysis. Of the eight scales assessed, clinically significant increases of 8–15 points were observed for both treatment groups on all but the Fatigue scale. The romiplostim treatment group showed statistically greater improvements on the Symptoms (P = 0.01), Bother (P = 0.008), Activity (P = 0.02), Psychological (P = 0.049), Fear (P < 0.001), Social Quality of Life (P = 0.002), and Overall Quality of Life (P = 0.02) scales compared with the standard-of-care group, although the between-group differences of 2–8 points on these scales are of uncertain clinical significance.

Romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP

Few data exist on the effects of romiplostim therapy in pediatric ITP patients. In a recent single-blind, placebo-controlled trial,2 18 patients aged 2.5 to 16 years with chronic refractory ITP (baseline platelet count < 20 × 109/L) who had not undergone splenectomy were randomized to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim (n = 12) or placebo (n = 6) for 12 weeks. Romiplostim was started at a dose of 1 μg/kg, escalated to 5 μg/kg at 5 weeks, and tapered afterward.

All patients had either no response or failed to maintain a response to at least two prior treatment modalities for ITP. All had received prior steroid treatment; 44% had received corticosteroids, IVIG, and anti-D immunogloblin in combination or sequentially; and 22% had received cytotoxic or immune-modulating agents. All such treatments were stopped 2 weeks prior to the study.

For patients in the romiplostim versus placebo group, mean age was 9.5 versus 7.0 years, 10 (83%) versus 3 (50%) were male, and median disease duration was 2.3 versus 3.0 years. Median baseline platelet counts were 10.5 × 109/L in both groups.

 

 

The median platelet count in the romiplostim group was significantly higher (P = 0.039) than that in the placebo group within 1 week of the first dose of romiplostim (1 μg/kg) and remained so at 3 weeks after the end of treatment (15 weeks total; median platelet count of 47.5 × 109/L vs 19.0 × 109/L; P = 0.001). Changes in platelet count in the romiplostim group were dose-dependent, with a median peak platelet count of 73.5 × 109/L reached after 5 weeks, when the dose was 5 μg/kg. Eleven of the 12 patients in the romiplostim group (93%) reached the target range of greater than 50 × 109/L by the fifth week. At week 12 (end of treatment), 10 romiplostim patients (83%) versus no placebo patients were at target levels. Six romiplostim-treated patients (50%) maintained target platelet count levels at 3 weeks after treatment.

Adverse events occurred in 50% of patients in each group. The most frequent adverse events were headache, epistaxis, cough, and vomiting, which occurred in one patient each in the romiplostim group (8%) and placebo group (17%). Two romiplostim-treated patients (17%) developed a skin rash. None of the patients had thrombocytosis or rebound thrombocytopenia, and none of the romiplostim-treated patients developed bone marrow fibrosis by week 18 of follow up.

How I treat ITP Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and its associated problems are frequently encountered by the practicing hematologist. When it comes treatment, there are several options:

  • If the platelet count is at least 30,000/μL and there is no active bleeding, close observation is the most prudent approach. In anticipation of the possibility of splenectomy at some point in their course, patients are offered immunization against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Hemophilus influenza, and Neisseria meningitides. In addition, I screen for exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV), because patients may at some point receive treatment with rituximab (Rituxan), which is associated with HBV reactivation.
  • For patients with a platelet count below 30,000/μL, evidence of impending bleeding (such as wet purpura), or frank bleeding, treatment is indicated. Typically, this involves the use of glucocorticoids, often in combination with IV gamma globulin (IVIG) or, occasionally, anti-D immunoglobulin.
  • For a platelet count below 10,000/μL, I give methylprednisolone, 1,000 mg/d IV, for 5 consecutive days with IVIG, 1 g/kg daily, for 2 consecutive days. I then shift the patient to oral prednisone, 1 mg/kg daily, for 1 week, followed by tapering the dose by 10 mg/wk, as allowed by the platelet count, which should remain at ≥ 30,000/μL. Failure of this approach, or the inability to reduce the prednisone dose to 10 mg/d or less, would raise the options of either giving rituximab, 375 mg/m2 per week, for 4 weeks or performing a therapeutic, laparoscopic-assisted splenectomy, the single intervention still the most likely to provide meaningful, long-lasting benefit.
  • In the setting of asplenia (including the absence of accessory splenic tissue), I favor a trial of a thrombopoietin mimetic, either romiplostim (Nplate) or eltrombopag (Promacta).

In the truly refractory patient, other options include calcineurin inhibitors, cytotoxic agents, danazol, tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors, and staphylococcal A column immunoadsorption.

— David M.J. Hoffman, MD, FACP

Rescue medication, consisting of IVIG 1 g/kg for two doses, was given to one romiplostim-treated patient (8%) due to head trauma and loss of consciousness and two placebo-treated patients (33%) during the 12-week study period, with no interruption of study drug being required. The number of romiplostim-treated patients with grade 3 bleeding decreased from four (33%) prior to the study to none during the study, and the number with grade 2 bleeding decreased from six (50%) to two (17%; P = 0.002).

These findings are similar to results observed in another small study of romiplostim in children with ITP.3,4 An open-label phase III study designed to study the long-term safety of romiplostim and the durability of platelet responses to the drug in pediatric patients currently is in the recruitment stage.5 In this extension trial, approximately 20 patients aged 1 to 18 years with ITP are to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim, starting at 1 μg/kg (or prior dose) and escalated to 10 μg/kg (based on the platelet count) over a period of 3 years. The primary outcome measure is the incidence of adverse events, including significant changes in laboratory values and the incidence of antibody formation. Secondary outcome measures include the platelet response (> 50 × 109/L) in the absence of rescue medication and the need for concurrent ITP medication (corticosteroids, danazol, or azathioprine) over the duration of the study.

 

 

References

1. Kuter DJ, Rummel M, Boccia R, et al. Romiplostim or standard of care in patients with immune thrombocytopenia. N Engl J Med 2010;363:1889–1899.
2. Elalfy MS, Abdelmaksoud AA, Eltonbary KY. Romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP: randomized placebo controlled study. Ann Hematol 2011;doi10.1007/s00277- 011-1172-9.
3. Buchanan GR, Bomgaars L, Bussel JB, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1/2 study to determine the safety and efficacy of romiplostim in children with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Blood 2009;114(22):680.
4. Safety and efficacy study of AMG 531 to treat ITP in pediatric subjects. ClinicalTrials. gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ show/NCT00515203. Accessed May 12, 2011.
5. A study evaluating the safety and efficacy of long-term dosing of romiplostim in thrombocytopenic pediatric subjects with immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia purpura. ClinicalTrials. gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials. gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01071954. Accessed May 12, 2011.

Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Thrombopoietin mimetic is superior to standard of care in adults with immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and demonstrates activity and tolerability in pediatric ITP patients
Thrombopoietin mimetic is superior to standard of care in adults with immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and demonstrates activity and tolerability in pediatric ITP patients

Romiplostim (Nplate) is a thrombopoietin receptor agonist that is currently indicated for the treatment of thrombocytopenia in patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) who have had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. In a recently reported phase III trial,1 romiplostim treatment was associated with a number of benefits compared with the standard of care in nonsplenectomized ITP patients: higher platelet response rate, lower rates of treatment failure and splenectomy, fewer bleeding events, and fewer blood transfusions.

The safety and efficacy of romiplostim in children with ITP have not yet been established. A recently reported placebo-controlled trial indicates good response and good tolerability of romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP.2

Romiplostim versus standard of care in adult nonsplenectomized patients

In a 52-week, multicenter, openlabel trial,1 patients with ITP who had not undergone splenectomy, had received at least one prior treatment for ITP, and had a platelet count of less than 50 × 109/L were randomized to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim (n = 157) or standard-ofcare treatment (n = 77). Romiplostim was started at a dose of 3 μg/kg, which could be increased up to a maximum of 10 μg/kg to achieve a target platelet count of 50–200 × 109/L. Standardof- care treatment was selected by the treating physician based on standard institutional practices or therapeutic guidelines. Throughout the study, patients in either treatment group could receive additional therapies for ITP, including short-term rescue therapy, such as IV immune globulin (IVIG), but excluding other thrombopoietin mimetics, as deemed medically necessary by investigators.

Study population, endpoints, other treatments

The median ages of patients in the romiplostim and standard-of-care groups were 58 and 57 years, respectively; 54% and 60% were women; the median duration since ITP diagnosis was 2.1 and 2.3 years; baseline median platelet counts were 33 × 109/L and 27 × 109/L; and 13% and 6% were receiving medications, primarily glucocorticoids (11% and 3%), for ITP at baseline. Splenectomy could be performed if study therapy was considered to be ineffective or was associated with severe side effects.

The primary endpoints of the trial were the incidence of splenectomy and the incidence of treatment failure, with treatment failure defined as a platelet count of 20 × 109/L or lower for 4 consecutive weeks, a major bleeding event, or a requirement for a change in therapy (including splenectomy) due to an adverse event or bleeding. In primary endpoint analyses, patients who received any study treatment and then discontinued study participation were counted as having both treatment failure and splenectomy.

During the study, ITP treatments other than romiplostim were received by 44% of patients in the romiplostim group and 79% of patients in the standard- of-care group, including glucocorticoids in 37% versus 63%, IVIG in 7% versus 33%, rituximab (Rituxan) in 1% versus 20%, azathioprine in 1% versus 9%, danazol in 2% versus 7%, other medications in 6% versus 19%, and platelet transfusions in 6% versus 16%.

Efficacy

The incidence of treatment failure was 11% in the romiplostim group versus 30% in the standard-of-care group (P < 0.001). Time to treatment failure was significantly prolonged in the romiplostim group (Figure 1a). The incidence of splenectomy was 9% in the romiplostim group versus 36% in the standard-of-care group (P < 0.001), and time to splenectomy was significantly prolonged in the include bleeding, thrombosis, hematologic cancer or myelodysplastic syndromes, and increased bone marrow reticulin.

After adjustment for duration of study-drug exposure, the romiplostim group had significantly fewer incidences of overall bleeding (P = 0.001) and grade 3 or higher bleeding (P = 0.02); no significant difference between the two treatment groups was observed for less severe bleeding. Overall, 260 bleeding events occurred in 80 patients (52%) in the romiplostim group, for a bleeding rate of 3.56 events/100 patient-weeks; 153 events occurred in 40 patients (53%) in the standard-of-care group, for a rate of 5.02 events/100 patient-weeks. Eight grade 3 or higher bleeding events occurred in five romiplostim-treated patients (3%), a rate of 0.11 events/100 patient weeks; 10 events occurred in five patients (7%) in the standard-ofcare group, a rate of 0.33 events/100 patient-weeks.

A total of 41 blood transfusions were given to 12 patients (8%) in the romiplostim group, whereas a total of 76 transfusions were given to 13 patients (17%) in the standard-of-care group. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the occurrence of thrombotic events. A total of 11 thrombotic events occurred in six patients (4%) in the romiplostim group, yielding a rate of 0.15 events/100 patientweeks, whereas two events occurred in two patients (3%) in the standardof- care group, yielding a rate of 0.07 events/100 patient-weeks.

 

 

Two cases of hematologic cancer were observed, consisting of lymphoma and myelodysplastic syndrome in one patient each in the standard-ofcare group. Bone marrow reticulin was found in one romiplostim-treated patient during 6 months posttreatment follow up, with the level being within the normal range (grade 2).

Thrombopoietin mimetics challenge the conventional wisdom about controlling ITP

Chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) affects 60,000 adults in the United States and is associated with the risk of life-threatening hemorrhage. For decades, the standard treatments included glucocorticoids and splenectomy. The advent and subsequent regulatory approval of the thrombopoietin mimetics romiplostim (Nplate) and eltrombopag (Promacta) have not only added to the therapeutic arsenal for this orphan disease but also successfully challenged the conventional wisdom that the key to controlling ITP is to reduce platelet destruction. Instead, these agents work by increasing intramedullary platelet production and are thus able to outpace the rate of peripheral destruction.

As reported by Kuter and colleagues last November in The New England Journal of Medicine, romiplostim is safe, well tolerated, and highly effective in the adult population with chronic ITP, including individuals with an intact spleen. Among the remaining questions regarding its use are: Where in the sequence of treatments for ITP do thrombopoietin mimetics belong? What is the long-term safety of these agents, given the changes to the bone marrow microenvironment that they induce? And, what will the cost impact be of a treatment that is designed for disease maintenance as opposed to providing a cure.

Thrombopoietin mimetics have not been widely tested for the treatment of pediatric ITP. Two small trials have shown that in children with disease that has been refractory to all standard approaches (with the exception of splenectomy), romiplostim is well tolerated, effective, and results in a meaningful reduction of clinically significant bleeding episodes. These data are preliminary but nevertheless provocative, and they offer the potential for new hope to children with chronic refractory ITP. Additional experience will be required to prove long-term safety and tolerability in the pediatric population before these new agents will be adopted into standard practice.

— David M.J. Hoffman, MD, FACP
Tower Hematology Oncology Medical Group
Beverly Hills, CA

Three deaths occurred during the study treatment period, including one death due to pneumonia in one romiplostim-treated patient and two deaths due to hepatic failure and cardiorespiratory arrest, respectively, in two patients in the standard-of-care group. Three additional deaths due to metastatic lung cancer, left ventricular failure, and hepatic neoplasm occurred in the standard-of-care group during the 6-month posttreatment follow up. None of the deaths was attributed to study treatment. No neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim or thrombopoietin were detected.

Quality of life

Quality of life was assessed by the ITP Patient Assessment Questionnaire, consisting of 44 ITP-specific items on each of 10 scales ranging from 0 to 100 points each (with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Scores on two scales (Women’s Reproductive Health and Work Quality of Life) could not be assessed due to inadequacies of the statistical model used in the analysis. Of the eight scales assessed, clinically significant increases of 8–15 points were observed for both treatment groups on all but the Fatigue scale. The romiplostim treatment group showed statistically greater improvements on the Symptoms (P = 0.01), Bother (P = 0.008), Activity (P = 0.02), Psychological (P = 0.049), Fear (P < 0.001), Social Quality of Life (P = 0.002), and Overall Quality of Life (P = 0.02) scales compared with the standard-of-care group, although the between-group differences of 2–8 points on these scales are of uncertain clinical significance.

Romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP

Few data exist on the effects of romiplostim therapy in pediatric ITP patients. In a recent single-blind, placebo-controlled trial,2 18 patients aged 2.5 to 16 years with chronic refractory ITP (baseline platelet count < 20 × 109/L) who had not undergone splenectomy were randomized to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim (n = 12) or placebo (n = 6) for 12 weeks. Romiplostim was started at a dose of 1 μg/kg, escalated to 5 μg/kg at 5 weeks, and tapered afterward.

All patients had either no response or failed to maintain a response to at least two prior treatment modalities for ITP. All had received prior steroid treatment; 44% had received corticosteroids, IVIG, and anti-D immunogloblin in combination or sequentially; and 22% had received cytotoxic or immune-modulating agents. All such treatments were stopped 2 weeks prior to the study.

For patients in the romiplostim versus placebo group, mean age was 9.5 versus 7.0 years, 10 (83%) versus 3 (50%) were male, and median disease duration was 2.3 versus 3.0 years. Median baseline platelet counts were 10.5 × 109/L in both groups.

 

 

The median platelet count in the romiplostim group was significantly higher (P = 0.039) than that in the placebo group within 1 week of the first dose of romiplostim (1 μg/kg) and remained so at 3 weeks after the end of treatment (15 weeks total; median platelet count of 47.5 × 109/L vs 19.0 × 109/L; P = 0.001). Changes in platelet count in the romiplostim group were dose-dependent, with a median peak platelet count of 73.5 × 109/L reached after 5 weeks, when the dose was 5 μg/kg. Eleven of the 12 patients in the romiplostim group (93%) reached the target range of greater than 50 × 109/L by the fifth week. At week 12 (end of treatment), 10 romiplostim patients (83%) versus no placebo patients were at target levels. Six romiplostim-treated patients (50%) maintained target platelet count levels at 3 weeks after treatment.

Adverse events occurred in 50% of patients in each group. The most frequent adverse events were headache, epistaxis, cough, and vomiting, which occurred in one patient each in the romiplostim group (8%) and placebo group (17%). Two romiplostim-treated patients (17%) developed a skin rash. None of the patients had thrombocytosis or rebound thrombocytopenia, and none of the romiplostim-treated patients developed bone marrow fibrosis by week 18 of follow up.

How I treat ITP Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and its associated problems are frequently encountered by the practicing hematologist. When it comes treatment, there are several options:

  • If the platelet count is at least 30,000/μL and there is no active bleeding, close observation is the most prudent approach. In anticipation of the possibility of splenectomy at some point in their course, patients are offered immunization against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Hemophilus influenza, and Neisseria meningitides. In addition, I screen for exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV), because patients may at some point receive treatment with rituximab (Rituxan), which is associated with HBV reactivation.
  • For patients with a platelet count below 30,000/μL, evidence of impending bleeding (such as wet purpura), or frank bleeding, treatment is indicated. Typically, this involves the use of glucocorticoids, often in combination with IV gamma globulin (IVIG) or, occasionally, anti-D immunoglobulin.
  • For a platelet count below 10,000/μL, I give methylprednisolone, 1,000 mg/d IV, for 5 consecutive days with IVIG, 1 g/kg daily, for 2 consecutive days. I then shift the patient to oral prednisone, 1 mg/kg daily, for 1 week, followed by tapering the dose by 10 mg/wk, as allowed by the platelet count, which should remain at ≥ 30,000/μL. Failure of this approach, or the inability to reduce the prednisone dose to 10 mg/d or less, would raise the options of either giving rituximab, 375 mg/m2 per week, for 4 weeks or performing a therapeutic, laparoscopic-assisted splenectomy, the single intervention still the most likely to provide meaningful, long-lasting benefit.
  • In the setting of asplenia (including the absence of accessory splenic tissue), I favor a trial of a thrombopoietin mimetic, either romiplostim (Nplate) or eltrombopag (Promacta).

In the truly refractory patient, other options include calcineurin inhibitors, cytotoxic agents, danazol, tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors, and staphylococcal A column immunoadsorption.

— David M.J. Hoffman, MD, FACP

Rescue medication, consisting of IVIG 1 g/kg for two doses, was given to one romiplostim-treated patient (8%) due to head trauma and loss of consciousness and two placebo-treated patients (33%) during the 12-week study period, with no interruption of study drug being required. The number of romiplostim-treated patients with grade 3 bleeding decreased from four (33%) prior to the study to none during the study, and the number with grade 2 bleeding decreased from six (50%) to two (17%; P = 0.002).

These findings are similar to results observed in another small study of romiplostim in children with ITP.3,4 An open-label phase III study designed to study the long-term safety of romiplostim and the durability of platelet responses to the drug in pediatric patients currently is in the recruitment stage.5 In this extension trial, approximately 20 patients aged 1 to 18 years with ITP are to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim, starting at 1 μg/kg (or prior dose) and escalated to 10 μg/kg (based on the platelet count) over a period of 3 years. The primary outcome measure is the incidence of adverse events, including significant changes in laboratory values and the incidence of antibody formation. Secondary outcome measures include the platelet response (> 50 × 109/L) in the absence of rescue medication and the need for concurrent ITP medication (corticosteroids, danazol, or azathioprine) over the duration of the study.

 

 

References

1. Kuter DJ, Rummel M, Boccia R, et al. Romiplostim or standard of care in patients with immune thrombocytopenia. N Engl J Med 2010;363:1889–1899.
2. Elalfy MS, Abdelmaksoud AA, Eltonbary KY. Romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP: randomized placebo controlled study. Ann Hematol 2011;doi10.1007/s00277- 011-1172-9.
3. Buchanan GR, Bomgaars L, Bussel JB, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1/2 study to determine the safety and efficacy of romiplostim in children with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Blood 2009;114(22):680.
4. Safety and efficacy study of AMG 531 to treat ITP in pediatric subjects. ClinicalTrials. gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ show/NCT00515203. Accessed May 12, 2011.
5. A study evaluating the safety and efficacy of long-term dosing of romiplostim in thrombocytopenic pediatric subjects with immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia purpura. ClinicalTrials. gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials. gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01071954. Accessed May 12, 2011.

Romiplostim (Nplate) is a thrombopoietin receptor agonist that is currently indicated for the treatment of thrombocytopenia in patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) who have had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. In a recently reported phase III trial,1 romiplostim treatment was associated with a number of benefits compared with the standard of care in nonsplenectomized ITP patients: higher platelet response rate, lower rates of treatment failure and splenectomy, fewer bleeding events, and fewer blood transfusions.

The safety and efficacy of romiplostim in children with ITP have not yet been established. A recently reported placebo-controlled trial indicates good response and good tolerability of romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP.2

Romiplostim versus standard of care in adult nonsplenectomized patients

In a 52-week, multicenter, openlabel trial,1 patients with ITP who had not undergone splenectomy, had received at least one prior treatment for ITP, and had a platelet count of less than 50 × 109/L were randomized to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim (n = 157) or standard-ofcare treatment (n = 77). Romiplostim was started at a dose of 3 μg/kg, which could be increased up to a maximum of 10 μg/kg to achieve a target platelet count of 50–200 × 109/L. Standardof- care treatment was selected by the treating physician based on standard institutional practices or therapeutic guidelines. Throughout the study, patients in either treatment group could receive additional therapies for ITP, including short-term rescue therapy, such as IV immune globulin (IVIG), but excluding other thrombopoietin mimetics, as deemed medically necessary by investigators.

Study population, endpoints, other treatments

The median ages of patients in the romiplostim and standard-of-care groups were 58 and 57 years, respectively; 54% and 60% were women; the median duration since ITP diagnosis was 2.1 and 2.3 years; baseline median platelet counts were 33 × 109/L and 27 × 109/L; and 13% and 6% were receiving medications, primarily glucocorticoids (11% and 3%), for ITP at baseline. Splenectomy could be performed if study therapy was considered to be ineffective or was associated with severe side effects.

The primary endpoints of the trial were the incidence of splenectomy and the incidence of treatment failure, with treatment failure defined as a platelet count of 20 × 109/L or lower for 4 consecutive weeks, a major bleeding event, or a requirement for a change in therapy (including splenectomy) due to an adverse event or bleeding. In primary endpoint analyses, patients who received any study treatment and then discontinued study participation were counted as having both treatment failure and splenectomy.

During the study, ITP treatments other than romiplostim were received by 44% of patients in the romiplostim group and 79% of patients in the standard- of-care group, including glucocorticoids in 37% versus 63%, IVIG in 7% versus 33%, rituximab (Rituxan) in 1% versus 20%, azathioprine in 1% versus 9%, danazol in 2% versus 7%, other medications in 6% versus 19%, and platelet transfusions in 6% versus 16%.

Efficacy

The incidence of treatment failure was 11% in the romiplostim group versus 30% in the standard-of-care group (P < 0.001). Time to treatment failure was significantly prolonged in the romiplostim group (Figure 1a). The incidence of splenectomy was 9% in the romiplostim group versus 36% in the standard-of-care group (P < 0.001), and time to splenectomy was significantly prolonged in the include bleeding, thrombosis, hematologic cancer or myelodysplastic syndromes, and increased bone marrow reticulin.

After adjustment for duration of study-drug exposure, the romiplostim group had significantly fewer incidences of overall bleeding (P = 0.001) and grade 3 or higher bleeding (P = 0.02); no significant difference between the two treatment groups was observed for less severe bleeding. Overall, 260 bleeding events occurred in 80 patients (52%) in the romiplostim group, for a bleeding rate of 3.56 events/100 patient-weeks; 153 events occurred in 40 patients (53%) in the standard-of-care group, for a rate of 5.02 events/100 patient-weeks. Eight grade 3 or higher bleeding events occurred in five romiplostim-treated patients (3%), a rate of 0.11 events/100 patient weeks; 10 events occurred in five patients (7%) in the standard-ofcare group, a rate of 0.33 events/100 patient-weeks.

A total of 41 blood transfusions were given to 12 patients (8%) in the romiplostim group, whereas a total of 76 transfusions were given to 13 patients (17%) in the standard-of-care group. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the occurrence of thrombotic events. A total of 11 thrombotic events occurred in six patients (4%) in the romiplostim group, yielding a rate of 0.15 events/100 patientweeks, whereas two events occurred in two patients (3%) in the standardof- care group, yielding a rate of 0.07 events/100 patient-weeks.

 

 

Two cases of hematologic cancer were observed, consisting of lymphoma and myelodysplastic syndrome in one patient each in the standard-ofcare group. Bone marrow reticulin was found in one romiplostim-treated patient during 6 months posttreatment follow up, with the level being within the normal range (grade 2).

Thrombopoietin mimetics challenge the conventional wisdom about controlling ITP

Chronic immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) affects 60,000 adults in the United States and is associated with the risk of life-threatening hemorrhage. For decades, the standard treatments included glucocorticoids and splenectomy. The advent and subsequent regulatory approval of the thrombopoietin mimetics romiplostim (Nplate) and eltrombopag (Promacta) have not only added to the therapeutic arsenal for this orphan disease but also successfully challenged the conventional wisdom that the key to controlling ITP is to reduce platelet destruction. Instead, these agents work by increasing intramedullary platelet production and are thus able to outpace the rate of peripheral destruction.

As reported by Kuter and colleagues last November in The New England Journal of Medicine, romiplostim is safe, well tolerated, and highly effective in the adult population with chronic ITP, including individuals with an intact spleen. Among the remaining questions regarding its use are: Where in the sequence of treatments for ITP do thrombopoietin mimetics belong? What is the long-term safety of these agents, given the changes to the bone marrow microenvironment that they induce? And, what will the cost impact be of a treatment that is designed for disease maintenance as opposed to providing a cure.

Thrombopoietin mimetics have not been widely tested for the treatment of pediatric ITP. Two small trials have shown that in children with disease that has been refractory to all standard approaches (with the exception of splenectomy), romiplostim is well tolerated, effective, and results in a meaningful reduction of clinically significant bleeding episodes. These data are preliminary but nevertheless provocative, and they offer the potential for new hope to children with chronic refractory ITP. Additional experience will be required to prove long-term safety and tolerability in the pediatric population before these new agents will be adopted into standard practice.

— David M.J. Hoffman, MD, FACP
Tower Hematology Oncology Medical Group
Beverly Hills, CA

Three deaths occurred during the study treatment period, including one death due to pneumonia in one romiplostim-treated patient and two deaths due to hepatic failure and cardiorespiratory arrest, respectively, in two patients in the standard-of-care group. Three additional deaths due to metastatic lung cancer, left ventricular failure, and hepatic neoplasm occurred in the standard-of-care group during the 6-month posttreatment follow up. None of the deaths was attributed to study treatment. No neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim or thrombopoietin were detected.

Quality of life

Quality of life was assessed by the ITP Patient Assessment Questionnaire, consisting of 44 ITP-specific items on each of 10 scales ranging from 0 to 100 points each (with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Scores on two scales (Women’s Reproductive Health and Work Quality of Life) could not be assessed due to inadequacies of the statistical model used in the analysis. Of the eight scales assessed, clinically significant increases of 8–15 points were observed for both treatment groups on all but the Fatigue scale. The romiplostim treatment group showed statistically greater improvements on the Symptoms (P = 0.01), Bother (P = 0.008), Activity (P = 0.02), Psychological (P = 0.049), Fear (P < 0.001), Social Quality of Life (P = 0.002), and Overall Quality of Life (P = 0.02) scales compared with the standard-of-care group, although the between-group differences of 2–8 points on these scales are of uncertain clinical significance.

Romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP

Few data exist on the effects of romiplostim therapy in pediatric ITP patients. In a recent single-blind, placebo-controlled trial,2 18 patients aged 2.5 to 16 years with chronic refractory ITP (baseline platelet count < 20 × 109/L) who had not undergone splenectomy were randomized to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim (n = 12) or placebo (n = 6) for 12 weeks. Romiplostim was started at a dose of 1 μg/kg, escalated to 5 μg/kg at 5 weeks, and tapered afterward.

All patients had either no response or failed to maintain a response to at least two prior treatment modalities for ITP. All had received prior steroid treatment; 44% had received corticosteroids, IVIG, and anti-D immunogloblin in combination or sequentially; and 22% had received cytotoxic or immune-modulating agents. All such treatments were stopped 2 weeks prior to the study.

For patients in the romiplostim versus placebo group, mean age was 9.5 versus 7.0 years, 10 (83%) versus 3 (50%) were male, and median disease duration was 2.3 versus 3.0 years. Median baseline platelet counts were 10.5 × 109/L in both groups.

 

 

The median platelet count in the romiplostim group was significantly higher (P = 0.039) than that in the placebo group within 1 week of the first dose of romiplostim (1 μg/kg) and remained so at 3 weeks after the end of treatment (15 weeks total; median platelet count of 47.5 × 109/L vs 19.0 × 109/L; P = 0.001). Changes in platelet count in the romiplostim group were dose-dependent, with a median peak platelet count of 73.5 × 109/L reached after 5 weeks, when the dose was 5 μg/kg. Eleven of the 12 patients in the romiplostim group (93%) reached the target range of greater than 50 × 109/L by the fifth week. At week 12 (end of treatment), 10 romiplostim patients (83%) versus no placebo patients were at target levels. Six romiplostim-treated patients (50%) maintained target platelet count levels at 3 weeks after treatment.

Adverse events occurred in 50% of patients in each group. The most frequent adverse events were headache, epistaxis, cough, and vomiting, which occurred in one patient each in the romiplostim group (8%) and placebo group (17%). Two romiplostim-treated patients (17%) developed a skin rash. None of the patients had thrombocytosis or rebound thrombocytopenia, and none of the romiplostim-treated patients developed bone marrow fibrosis by week 18 of follow up.

How I treat ITP Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) and its associated problems are frequently encountered by the practicing hematologist. When it comes treatment, there are several options:

  • If the platelet count is at least 30,000/μL and there is no active bleeding, close observation is the most prudent approach. In anticipation of the possibility of splenectomy at some point in their course, patients are offered immunization against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Hemophilus influenza, and Neisseria meningitides. In addition, I screen for exposure to hepatitis B virus (HBV), because patients may at some point receive treatment with rituximab (Rituxan), which is associated with HBV reactivation.
  • For patients with a platelet count below 30,000/μL, evidence of impending bleeding (such as wet purpura), or frank bleeding, treatment is indicated. Typically, this involves the use of glucocorticoids, often in combination with IV gamma globulin (IVIG) or, occasionally, anti-D immunoglobulin.
  • For a platelet count below 10,000/μL, I give methylprednisolone, 1,000 mg/d IV, for 5 consecutive days with IVIG, 1 g/kg daily, for 2 consecutive days. I then shift the patient to oral prednisone, 1 mg/kg daily, for 1 week, followed by tapering the dose by 10 mg/wk, as allowed by the platelet count, which should remain at ≥ 30,000/μL. Failure of this approach, or the inability to reduce the prednisone dose to 10 mg/d or less, would raise the options of either giving rituximab, 375 mg/m2 per week, for 4 weeks or performing a therapeutic, laparoscopic-assisted splenectomy, the single intervention still the most likely to provide meaningful, long-lasting benefit.
  • In the setting of asplenia (including the absence of accessory splenic tissue), I favor a trial of a thrombopoietin mimetic, either romiplostim (Nplate) or eltrombopag (Promacta).

In the truly refractory patient, other options include calcineurin inhibitors, cytotoxic agents, danazol, tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors, and staphylococcal A column immunoadsorption.

— David M.J. Hoffman, MD, FACP

Rescue medication, consisting of IVIG 1 g/kg for two doses, was given to one romiplostim-treated patient (8%) due to head trauma and loss of consciousness and two placebo-treated patients (33%) during the 12-week study period, with no interruption of study drug being required. The number of romiplostim-treated patients with grade 3 bleeding decreased from four (33%) prior to the study to none during the study, and the number with grade 2 bleeding decreased from six (50%) to two (17%; P = 0.002).

These findings are similar to results observed in another small study of romiplostim in children with ITP.3,4 An open-label phase III study designed to study the long-term safety of romiplostim and the durability of platelet responses to the drug in pediatric patients currently is in the recruitment stage.5 In this extension trial, approximately 20 patients aged 1 to 18 years with ITP are to receive weekly SC injections of romiplostim, starting at 1 μg/kg (or prior dose) and escalated to 10 μg/kg (based on the platelet count) over a period of 3 years. The primary outcome measure is the incidence of adverse events, including significant changes in laboratory values and the incidence of antibody formation. Secondary outcome measures include the platelet response (> 50 × 109/L) in the absence of rescue medication and the need for concurrent ITP medication (corticosteroids, danazol, or azathioprine) over the duration of the study.

 

 

References

1. Kuter DJ, Rummel M, Boccia R, et al. Romiplostim or standard of care in patients with immune thrombocytopenia. N Engl J Med 2010;363:1889–1899.
2. Elalfy MS, Abdelmaksoud AA, Eltonbary KY. Romiplostim in children with chronic refractory ITP: randomized placebo controlled study. Ann Hematol 2011;doi10.1007/s00277- 011-1172-9.
3. Buchanan GR, Bomgaars L, Bussel JB, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1/2 study to determine the safety and efficacy of romiplostim in children with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Blood 2009;114(22):680.
4. Safety and efficacy study of AMG 531 to treat ITP in pediatric subjects. ClinicalTrials. gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ show/NCT00515203. Accessed May 12, 2011.
5. A study evaluating the safety and efficacy of long-term dosing of romiplostim in thrombocytopenic pediatric subjects with immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia purpura. ClinicalTrials. gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials. gov/ct2/show/study/NCT01071954. Accessed May 12, 2011.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Update on romiplostim therapy for immune thrombocytopenic purpura
Display Headline
Update on romiplostim therapy for immune thrombocytopenic purpura
Article Source

FROM THE FEDERAL REGISTER

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Pomalidomide in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma and carfilzomib in refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

From the Oncologist's Perspective - Evolving therapies for multiple myeloma
Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 11:03
Display Headline
Pomalidomide in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma and carfilzomib in refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
Pomalidomide and carfilzomib represent active and well-tolerated new options in combination regimens.

What's new, what's important

Treatment of multiple myeloma is evolving rapidly. It is tough to keep up with the rapid pace of new drugs, updates, and changes in the standard of care. In this issue of Community Oncology we bring to you two new exciting drugs on the horizon, pomalidomide and carfilzomib. In addition to introducing these two new drugs, we have asked Dr. Noopur Raje to explain how she treats a newly diagnosed patient with multiple myeloma.

Pomalidomide, a thalidomide (Thalomid) analog, is a promising myeloma drug with encouraging responses in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients. Carfilzomib is a novel proteasome inhibitor. When combined with lenalidomide (Revlimid) in the first-line setting, it produced a 100% response rate. Phase III studies are in progress or being completed. It will be exciting to see the final results of these studies. 

With this issue we are changing the format of Community Translations to incorporate the mechanism of action or pathophysiology of some of these new advances so that a clinician can relate to them in a clinical setting. 

--Jame Abraham, MD, Editor

Two of the most promising drugs on the horizon for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are pomalidomide and carfilzomib. Both agents have shown significant single-agent activity in clinical trials. They seem to work in patients whose MM is resistant to other treatments and are being studied in combination regimens.

Pomalidomide

Pomalidomide is a new immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) with high in vitro potency. In initial experience with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed MM, Lacy and colleagues found an overall response rate of 63% and observed responses in some patients who were refractory to lenalidomide (Revlimid), suggesting an absence of cross-resistance between pomalidomide and other IMiDs. In a recently reported phase II study,1 these investigators assessed the combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM, finding the combination to be highly active and well tolerated.

In this study, 34 patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM were treated with oral pomalidomide (2 mg daily) and dexamethasone (40 mg once weekly) in 28-day cycles. Patients had a median age of 61.5 years, 68% were male, 85% had an ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status of 0 or 1, and 41% were categorized as high risk. The median time from diagnosis was 62 months. The median number of prior chemotherapy regimens was four. In addition to lenalidomide, 58% of patients had received prior thalidomide (Thalomid), and 59% had received prior bortezomib (Velcade); 68% of patients had undergone prior autologous stem cell transplantation, and 53% had prior radiation therapy. Twenty patients (59%) had peripheral neuropathy at baseline.

Patients received a median of 5 cycles (range, 1−14) of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism was given in 204 of 209 treatment cycles (aspirin in 150 cycles and warfarin in 54 cycles). Treatment responses consisted of a very good partial response in 9%, a partial response in 23%, and a minimal response in 15%, for an overall clinical benefit rate of 47%; 35% of patients had stable disease, and 18% had disease progression. The median time to response was 2 months. Response was observed in 8 of 14 (57%) high-risk patients, in 8 of 19 (42%) who received previous thalidomide treatment, and in 9 of 20 (45%) who were given previous bortezomib treatment. In eight patients with stable disease, the pomalidomide dose was increased to 4 mg/d, with one patient improving to a partial response. The median duration of response in 11 patients with a partial response or better was 9.1 months. The median progression-free survival was 4.8 months, and progression-free survival did not differ between high-risk and standard-risk patients. The median overall survival was 13.9 months. During follow-up, treatment was stopped due to disease progression in 23 patients, 3 withdrew from the study due to patient/physician discretion, and 8 continued to receive treatment. Seven patients died, all due to disease progression. The median follow-up of patients remaining alive was 8.3 months.

Pomalidomide/dexamethasone treatment was well tolerated. Toxicity consisted mostly of myelosuppression. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity at least possibly related to treatment occurred in 38% of patients, including neutropenia in 29%, anemia in 12%, and thrombocytopenia in 9%. The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicity was fatigue, which occurred in 9% of patients (all grade 3); grade 3 pneumonitis, edema, pneumonia, and folliculitis were each observed in one patient. Nine patients (26%) had neuropathy during treatment (six grade 1, three grade 2); they included six patients with neuropathy at baseline, three of whom had a worsening of grade.
 

 

Carfilzomib

Carfilzomib is a highly selective epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor with minimal affinity for nontarget proteases. In a recent phase II trial in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, reported at the 2010 American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting, carfilzomib produced durable responses and was well tolerated.2 An ongoing phase I/II trial assessing carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed MM, also reported at the 2010 ASH meeting, has shown good activity and tolerability of the regimen.3 A phase III trial comparing carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed MM has been initiated.

Relapsed/refractory MM

In the trial in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, 266 patients with multiply relapsed MM who had disease refractory to their last treatment received carfilzomib (20 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16) every 28 days for the first cycle, with the dose then being escalated to 27 mg/m2 on the same schedule for up to 12 cycles.2 Prior therapies included bortezomib, either lenalidomide or thalidomide, and an alkylating agent. Patients had a median duration of MM of 5.4 years and had received a median of 5 prior lines of chemotherapy and a median of 13 antimyeloma treatments; prior treatments included bortezomib in 99.6% of patients (a median of two prior regimens containing bortezomib), lenalidomide in 94%, thalidomide in 74%, corticosteroids in 98%, alkylating agents in 91%, and stem cell transplantation in 74%. Overall, 65% of patients were refractory to bortezomib prior to study entry.

At the time of reporting, 79 patients (30%) had completed at least 6 cycles of study treatment, approximately 11% had completed 12 cycles (with most entering an extension phase of the study), and 15 patients remained on study (all with more than 10 cycles of study treatment). Among 257 patients evaluable for response, 0.4% (one patient) had a complete response, 4.7% had a very good partial response, and 19% had a partial response, for an overall response rate of 24%; an additional 12% of patients had a minimal response, yielding an overall clinical benefit rate of 36%. Stable disease for at least 6 weeks was achieved in 32%. Among patients with a partial response or better, the median duration of response was 7.4 months. Among patients with a minimal response, the median duration of response was 6.3 months, indicating durable minor responses.

Toxicity consisted mainly of myelosuppression. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities consisted of thrombocytopenia in 18% of patients, lymphopenia in 11%, neutropenia in 8%, and anemia in 7%.4 Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included fatigue in 6% of patients; pneumonia and congestive cardiac failure in 3% each; nausea, dyspnea, increased blood creatinine levels, and increased blood uric acid levels in 1% each; and diarrhea in 0.4%. Grade 1/2 peripheral neuropathy was present in 77% of patients at baseline; new-onset neuropathy was infrequent, with grade 3 or lower neuropathy occurring in less than 1% of patients.2

Newly diagnosed MM

In an ongoing phase I/II trial, patients with newly diagnosed MM are receiving carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone.3 Carfilzomib is started at 20 mg/m2 (dose level 1) and increased to 27 mg/m2 (dose level 2) and 36 mg/m2 (dose level 3) given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 in 28-day cycles. Lenalidomide is given at 25 mg/d on days 1−21 in each cycle, and dexamethasone is given weekly at 40 mg during cycles 1−4 and at 20 mg during cycles 5−8. Patients with a partial response or better are eligible to proceed to stem cell collection and autologous stem cell transplantation after at least 4 cycles and can continue study treatment after transplantation. After completion of 8 cycles, patients are to receive maintenance cycles consisting of carfilzomib on days 1, 2, 15, and 16; lenalidomide on days 1−21; and weekly dexamethasone at doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. A planned 36 patients are to be treated at the carfilzomib maximum tolerated dose.

At the time of reporting, 24 patients had been enrolled, 4 at dose level 1, 14 at dose level 2, and 6 at dose level 3. Toxicity data were available for 21 patients, including 19 who completed at least 1 cycle of treatment. A single dose-limiting toxicity event was observed, consisting of nonfebrile neutropenia in a patient at dose level 2. The maximum tolerated dose had not yet been reached. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities consisted of neutropenia in three patients, thrombocytopenia in three patients, and anemia in one patient. Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicities included five cases of elevated blood glucose levels, deep vein thrombosis during aspirin prophylaxis in one patient, and fatigue in one patient. Emergent peripheral neuropathy was observed in two patients, who developed grade 1 neuropathy.
 

 

At the time of reporting, 23 patients continued on treatment, with 20 having no need for dose modifications. After a median of 4 months of treatment (range, 1−8 months), the preliminary response rate in 19 evaluable patients completing at least 1 cycle was 100% with at least a partial response, including 63% with a very good partial response and 37% with a complete response or near-complete response. Partial responses were observed in 17 of 19 patients after 1 cycle, with responses improving in all patients with continuing treatment. Seven patients had proceeded to stem cell collection using growth factors only after a median of 4 cycles, and all resumed study treatment after stem cell collection. No disease progression had been observed in any of the evaluable patients, and all remained alive.

References

1. Lacy MQ, Hayman SR, Gertz MA, et al. Pomalidomide (CC4047) plus low dose dexamethasone (Pom/dex) is active and well tolerated in lenalidomide refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Leukemia 2010;24:1934−1939.

2. Siegel DSD, Martin T, Wang M, et al. Results of PX-171-003-A1, an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:985.

3. Jakubowiak AJ, Dytfeld D, Jagannath S, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results of phase I/II MMRC trial. Blood 2010;116:862.

4. Singhal SB, Siegel DSD, Martin T, et al. Pooled safety analysis from phase 1 and 2 studies of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:1954.

Body

Noopur Raje, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center; Division of Hematology and Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital; and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Although multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable bone marrow

cancer, survival rates have improved markedly over the past decade. An

understanding of MM pathobiology (Figure 1) and improvement in stem cell

transplantation, better supportive care, and novel therapies with

higher efficacy and lower toxicity are all responsible for this

improvement. The availability of a rich pipeline of novel agents

undergoing early-phase clinical trials in MM is an exciting and active

area of research.1

Current treatment

Over the past several years, five therapeutic strategies have

received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval either as

monotherapy or in combination for treating MM, with thalidomide

(Thalomid), lenalidomide (Revlimid), and bortezomib (Velcade) as

important backbone drugs in these approaches. In the upfront setting,

thalidomide with dexamethasone2 and bortezomib in combination with melphalan and prednisone3

increased the overall response rate and significantly prolonged time to

disease progression and are FDA approved. For treatment of relapsed MM,

bortezomib alone4 and in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil),5 as well as lenalidomide/dexamethasone,6

have been approved. Results of a recent phase III randomized clinical

trial suggest that lower doses of dexamethasone provide a survival

advantage, at least in the upfront setting, mainly due to the increased

toxicity of high doses of dexamethasone.7

The availability of these novel agents has not only provided us

with several treatment options but has had an important impact on the

overall survival of our patients. To improve upon current outcomes,

optimal combinations of bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide are

currently under evaluation in phase II/III clinical trials.

Novel approaches

The preceding review refers to recent data on pomalidomide, the

newest immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) analog, which has shown single-agent

activity in phase I studies and was subsequently tested in a phase II

trial in combination with low-dose dexamethasone in patients with

relapsed or refractory MM. Pomalidomide/dexamethasone was found to be

highly active and well tolerated, providing a clinical benefit in 47% of

patients and no grade 3 neuropathy. These findings have led to a large

phase II study, which has completed accrual and is awaiting analysis.

Another promising agent discussed here is the novel proteasome

inhibitor carfilzomib. Although bortezomib is an effective agent in MM,

about 20% of newly diagnosed patients are resistant to bortezomib, and,

ultimately, all patients relapse and develop resistance to the drug.

Carfilzomib irreversibly blocks chymotrypsin-like activity and in phase I

studies achieved more than 80% proteasome inhibition. Encouraging data

presented at the 2010 annual meeting of the American Society of

Hematology demonstrated that it was well tolerated and had an overall

clinical benefit rate of 36% in relapsed/refractory MM.8 In the upfront setting, carfilzomib combined with lenalidomide led to a 100% response rate.9

This combination with low-dose dexamethasone is currently

undergoing testing in a phase III registration trial. These data,

therefore, provide important therapeutic options among the armamentarium

of current and future antimyeloma therapies, helping transform MM into

an even more chronic disease than it is today and ultimately leading to a

cure.

References

1. Cirstea D, Vallet S, Raje N. Future novel single agent and combination therapies. Cancer J 2009;15:511-518.

2. Rajkumar

SV, Rosinol L, Hussein M, et al. Multicenter, randomized, double-blind,

placebo-controlled study of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared

with dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple

myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2171-2177.

3. San

Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al. Bortezomib plus melphalan and

prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med

2008;359:906-917.

4. Richardson

PG, Sonneveld P, Schuster MW, et al. Bortezomib or high-dose

dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med

2005;352:2487-2498.

5. Orlowski

RZ, Nagler A, Sonneveld P, et al. Randomized phase III study of

pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus bortezomib compared with bortezomib

alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: combination therapy

improves time to progression. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3892-3901.

6. Dimopoulos

MA, Chen C, Spencer A, et al. Long-term follow-up on overall survival

from the MM-009 and MM-010 phase III trials of lenalidomide plus

dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Leukemia 2009;23:2147-2152.

7. Rajkumar

SV, Jacobus S, Callander NS, et al. Lenalidomide plus high-dose

dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone as initial

therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an open-label randomised

controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:29-37.

8. Siegel

DSD, Martin T, Wang M, et al. Results of PX-171-003-A1, an open-label,

single-arm, phase 2 study of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients (pts) with

relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:985.

9. Jakubowiak

AJ, Dytfeld D, Jagannath S, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and

dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results of

phase I/II MMRC trial. Blood 2010;116:862.

Dr. Raje can be reached at [email protected].

Author and Disclosure Information

Publications
Topics
Author and Disclosure Information

Author and Disclosure Information

Pomalidomide and carfilzomib represent active and well-tolerated new options in combination regimens.
Pomalidomide and carfilzomib represent active and well-tolerated new options in combination regimens.
Body

Noopur Raje, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center; Division of Hematology and Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital; and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Although multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable bone marrow

cancer, survival rates have improved markedly over the past decade. An

understanding of MM pathobiology (Figure 1) and improvement in stem cell

transplantation, better supportive care, and novel therapies with

higher efficacy and lower toxicity are all responsible for this

improvement. The availability of a rich pipeline of novel agents

undergoing early-phase clinical trials in MM is an exciting and active

area of research.1

Current treatment

Over the past several years, five therapeutic strategies have

received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval either as

monotherapy or in combination for treating MM, with thalidomide

(Thalomid), lenalidomide (Revlimid), and bortezomib (Velcade) as

important backbone drugs in these approaches. In the upfront setting,

thalidomide with dexamethasone2 and bortezomib in combination with melphalan and prednisone3

increased the overall response rate and significantly prolonged time to

disease progression and are FDA approved. For treatment of relapsed MM,

bortezomib alone4 and in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil),5 as well as lenalidomide/dexamethasone,6

have been approved. Results of a recent phase III randomized clinical

trial suggest that lower doses of dexamethasone provide a survival

advantage, at least in the upfront setting, mainly due to the increased

toxicity of high doses of dexamethasone.7

The availability of these novel agents has not only provided us

with several treatment options but has had an important impact on the

overall survival of our patients. To improve upon current outcomes,

optimal combinations of bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide are

currently under evaluation in phase II/III clinical trials.

Novel approaches

The preceding review refers to recent data on pomalidomide, the

newest immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) analog, which has shown single-agent

activity in phase I studies and was subsequently tested in a phase II

trial in combination with low-dose dexamethasone in patients with

relapsed or refractory MM. Pomalidomide/dexamethasone was found to be

highly active and well tolerated, providing a clinical benefit in 47% of

patients and no grade 3 neuropathy. These findings have led to a large

phase II study, which has completed accrual and is awaiting analysis.

Another promising agent discussed here is the novel proteasome

inhibitor carfilzomib. Although bortezomib is an effective agent in MM,

about 20% of newly diagnosed patients are resistant to bortezomib, and,

ultimately, all patients relapse and develop resistance to the drug.

Carfilzomib irreversibly blocks chymotrypsin-like activity and in phase I

studies achieved more than 80% proteasome inhibition. Encouraging data

presented at the 2010 annual meeting of the American Society of

Hematology demonstrated that it was well tolerated and had an overall

clinical benefit rate of 36% in relapsed/refractory MM.8 In the upfront setting, carfilzomib combined with lenalidomide led to a 100% response rate.9

This combination with low-dose dexamethasone is currently

undergoing testing in a phase III registration trial. These data,

therefore, provide important therapeutic options among the armamentarium

of current and future antimyeloma therapies, helping transform MM into

an even more chronic disease than it is today and ultimately leading to a

cure.

References

1. Cirstea D, Vallet S, Raje N. Future novel single agent and combination therapies. Cancer J 2009;15:511-518.

2. Rajkumar

SV, Rosinol L, Hussein M, et al. Multicenter, randomized, double-blind,

placebo-controlled study of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared

with dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple

myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2171-2177.

3. San

Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al. Bortezomib plus melphalan and

prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med

2008;359:906-917.

4. Richardson

PG, Sonneveld P, Schuster MW, et al. Bortezomib or high-dose

dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med

2005;352:2487-2498.

5. Orlowski

RZ, Nagler A, Sonneveld P, et al. Randomized phase III study of

pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus bortezomib compared with bortezomib

alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: combination therapy

improves time to progression. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3892-3901.

6. Dimopoulos

MA, Chen C, Spencer A, et al. Long-term follow-up on overall survival

from the MM-009 and MM-010 phase III trials of lenalidomide plus

dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Leukemia 2009;23:2147-2152.

7. Rajkumar

SV, Jacobus S, Callander NS, et al. Lenalidomide plus high-dose

dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone as initial

therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an open-label randomised

controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:29-37.

8. Siegel

DSD, Martin T, Wang M, et al. Results of PX-171-003-A1, an open-label,

single-arm, phase 2 study of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients (pts) with

relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:985.

9. Jakubowiak

AJ, Dytfeld D, Jagannath S, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and

dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results of

phase I/II MMRC trial. Blood 2010;116:862.

Dr. Raje can be reached at [email protected].

Body

Noopur Raje, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center; Division of Hematology and Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital; and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Although multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable bone marrow

cancer, survival rates have improved markedly over the past decade. An

understanding of MM pathobiology (Figure 1) and improvement in stem cell

transplantation, better supportive care, and novel therapies with

higher efficacy and lower toxicity are all responsible for this

improvement. The availability of a rich pipeline of novel agents

undergoing early-phase clinical trials in MM is an exciting and active

area of research.1

Current treatment

Over the past several years, five therapeutic strategies have

received US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval either as

monotherapy or in combination for treating MM, with thalidomide

(Thalomid), lenalidomide (Revlimid), and bortezomib (Velcade) as

important backbone drugs in these approaches. In the upfront setting,

thalidomide with dexamethasone2 and bortezomib in combination with melphalan and prednisone3

increased the overall response rate and significantly prolonged time to

disease progression and are FDA approved. For treatment of relapsed MM,

bortezomib alone4 and in combination with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (Doxil),5 as well as lenalidomide/dexamethasone,6

have been approved. Results of a recent phase III randomized clinical

trial suggest that lower doses of dexamethasone provide a survival

advantage, at least in the upfront setting, mainly due to the increased

toxicity of high doses of dexamethasone.7

The availability of these novel agents has not only provided us

with several treatment options but has had an important impact on the

overall survival of our patients. To improve upon current outcomes,

optimal combinations of bortezomib, thalidomide, and lenalidomide are

currently under evaluation in phase II/III clinical trials.

Novel approaches

The preceding review refers to recent data on pomalidomide, the

newest immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) analog, which has shown single-agent

activity in phase I studies and was subsequently tested in a phase II

trial in combination with low-dose dexamethasone in patients with

relapsed or refractory MM. Pomalidomide/dexamethasone was found to be

highly active and well tolerated, providing a clinical benefit in 47% of

patients and no grade 3 neuropathy. These findings have led to a large

phase II study, which has completed accrual and is awaiting analysis.

Another promising agent discussed here is the novel proteasome

inhibitor carfilzomib. Although bortezomib is an effective agent in MM,

about 20% of newly diagnosed patients are resistant to bortezomib, and,

ultimately, all patients relapse and develop resistance to the drug.

Carfilzomib irreversibly blocks chymotrypsin-like activity and in phase I

studies achieved more than 80% proteasome inhibition. Encouraging data

presented at the 2010 annual meeting of the American Society of

Hematology demonstrated that it was well tolerated and had an overall

clinical benefit rate of 36% in relapsed/refractory MM.8 In the upfront setting, carfilzomib combined with lenalidomide led to a 100% response rate.9

This combination with low-dose dexamethasone is currently

undergoing testing in a phase III registration trial. These data,

therefore, provide important therapeutic options among the armamentarium

of current and future antimyeloma therapies, helping transform MM into

an even more chronic disease than it is today and ultimately leading to a

cure.

References

1. Cirstea D, Vallet S, Raje N. Future novel single agent and combination therapies. Cancer J 2009;15:511-518.

2. Rajkumar

SV, Rosinol L, Hussein M, et al. Multicenter, randomized, double-blind,

placebo-controlled study of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared

with dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple

myeloma. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:2171-2177.

3. San

Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al. Bortezomib plus melphalan and

prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med

2008;359:906-917.

4. Richardson

PG, Sonneveld P, Schuster MW, et al. Bortezomib or high-dose

dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med

2005;352:2487-2498.

5. Orlowski

RZ, Nagler A, Sonneveld P, et al. Randomized phase III study of

pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus bortezomib compared with bortezomib

alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: combination therapy

improves time to progression. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3892-3901.

6. Dimopoulos

MA, Chen C, Spencer A, et al. Long-term follow-up on overall survival

from the MM-009 and MM-010 phase III trials of lenalidomide plus

dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Leukemia 2009;23:2147-2152.

7. Rajkumar

SV, Jacobus S, Callander NS, et al. Lenalidomide plus high-dose

dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone as initial

therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an open-label randomised

controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:29-37.

8. Siegel

DSD, Martin T, Wang M, et al. Results of PX-171-003-A1, an open-label,

single-arm, phase 2 study of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients (pts) with

relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:985.

9. Jakubowiak

AJ, Dytfeld D, Jagannath S, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and

dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results of

phase I/II MMRC trial. Blood 2010;116:862.

Dr. Raje can be reached at [email protected].

Title
From the Oncologist's Perspective - Evolving therapies for multiple myeloma
From the Oncologist's Perspective - Evolving therapies for multiple myeloma

What's new, what's important

Treatment of multiple myeloma is evolving rapidly. It is tough to keep up with the rapid pace of new drugs, updates, and changes in the standard of care. In this issue of Community Oncology we bring to you two new exciting drugs on the horizon, pomalidomide and carfilzomib. In addition to introducing these two new drugs, we have asked Dr. Noopur Raje to explain how she treats a newly diagnosed patient with multiple myeloma.

Pomalidomide, a thalidomide (Thalomid) analog, is a promising myeloma drug with encouraging responses in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients. Carfilzomib is a novel proteasome inhibitor. When combined with lenalidomide (Revlimid) in the first-line setting, it produced a 100% response rate. Phase III studies are in progress or being completed. It will be exciting to see the final results of these studies. 

With this issue we are changing the format of Community Translations to incorporate the mechanism of action or pathophysiology of some of these new advances so that a clinician can relate to them in a clinical setting. 

--Jame Abraham, MD, Editor

Two of the most promising drugs on the horizon for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are pomalidomide and carfilzomib. Both agents have shown significant single-agent activity in clinical trials. They seem to work in patients whose MM is resistant to other treatments and are being studied in combination regimens.

Pomalidomide

Pomalidomide is a new immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) with high in vitro potency. In initial experience with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed MM, Lacy and colleagues found an overall response rate of 63% and observed responses in some patients who were refractory to lenalidomide (Revlimid), suggesting an absence of cross-resistance between pomalidomide and other IMiDs. In a recently reported phase II study,1 these investigators assessed the combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM, finding the combination to be highly active and well tolerated.

In this study, 34 patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM were treated with oral pomalidomide (2 mg daily) and dexamethasone (40 mg once weekly) in 28-day cycles. Patients had a median age of 61.5 years, 68% were male, 85% had an ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status of 0 or 1, and 41% were categorized as high risk. The median time from diagnosis was 62 months. The median number of prior chemotherapy regimens was four. In addition to lenalidomide, 58% of patients had received prior thalidomide (Thalomid), and 59% had received prior bortezomib (Velcade); 68% of patients had undergone prior autologous stem cell transplantation, and 53% had prior radiation therapy. Twenty patients (59%) had peripheral neuropathy at baseline.

Patients received a median of 5 cycles (range, 1−14) of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism was given in 204 of 209 treatment cycles (aspirin in 150 cycles and warfarin in 54 cycles). Treatment responses consisted of a very good partial response in 9%, a partial response in 23%, and a minimal response in 15%, for an overall clinical benefit rate of 47%; 35% of patients had stable disease, and 18% had disease progression. The median time to response was 2 months. Response was observed in 8 of 14 (57%) high-risk patients, in 8 of 19 (42%) who received previous thalidomide treatment, and in 9 of 20 (45%) who were given previous bortezomib treatment. In eight patients with stable disease, the pomalidomide dose was increased to 4 mg/d, with one patient improving to a partial response. The median duration of response in 11 patients with a partial response or better was 9.1 months. The median progression-free survival was 4.8 months, and progression-free survival did not differ between high-risk and standard-risk patients. The median overall survival was 13.9 months. During follow-up, treatment was stopped due to disease progression in 23 patients, 3 withdrew from the study due to patient/physician discretion, and 8 continued to receive treatment. Seven patients died, all due to disease progression. The median follow-up of patients remaining alive was 8.3 months.

Pomalidomide/dexamethasone treatment was well tolerated. Toxicity consisted mostly of myelosuppression. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity at least possibly related to treatment occurred in 38% of patients, including neutropenia in 29%, anemia in 12%, and thrombocytopenia in 9%. The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicity was fatigue, which occurred in 9% of patients (all grade 3); grade 3 pneumonitis, edema, pneumonia, and folliculitis were each observed in one patient. Nine patients (26%) had neuropathy during treatment (six grade 1, three grade 2); they included six patients with neuropathy at baseline, three of whom had a worsening of grade.
 

 

Carfilzomib

Carfilzomib is a highly selective epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor with minimal affinity for nontarget proteases. In a recent phase II trial in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, reported at the 2010 American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting, carfilzomib produced durable responses and was well tolerated.2 An ongoing phase I/II trial assessing carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed MM, also reported at the 2010 ASH meeting, has shown good activity and tolerability of the regimen.3 A phase III trial comparing carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed MM has been initiated.

Relapsed/refractory MM

In the trial in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, 266 patients with multiply relapsed MM who had disease refractory to their last treatment received carfilzomib (20 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16) every 28 days for the first cycle, with the dose then being escalated to 27 mg/m2 on the same schedule for up to 12 cycles.2 Prior therapies included bortezomib, either lenalidomide or thalidomide, and an alkylating agent. Patients had a median duration of MM of 5.4 years and had received a median of 5 prior lines of chemotherapy and a median of 13 antimyeloma treatments; prior treatments included bortezomib in 99.6% of patients (a median of two prior regimens containing bortezomib), lenalidomide in 94%, thalidomide in 74%, corticosteroids in 98%, alkylating agents in 91%, and stem cell transplantation in 74%. Overall, 65% of patients were refractory to bortezomib prior to study entry.

At the time of reporting, 79 patients (30%) had completed at least 6 cycles of study treatment, approximately 11% had completed 12 cycles (with most entering an extension phase of the study), and 15 patients remained on study (all with more than 10 cycles of study treatment). Among 257 patients evaluable for response, 0.4% (one patient) had a complete response, 4.7% had a very good partial response, and 19% had a partial response, for an overall response rate of 24%; an additional 12% of patients had a minimal response, yielding an overall clinical benefit rate of 36%. Stable disease for at least 6 weeks was achieved in 32%. Among patients with a partial response or better, the median duration of response was 7.4 months. Among patients with a minimal response, the median duration of response was 6.3 months, indicating durable minor responses.

Toxicity consisted mainly of myelosuppression. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities consisted of thrombocytopenia in 18% of patients, lymphopenia in 11%, neutropenia in 8%, and anemia in 7%.4 Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included fatigue in 6% of patients; pneumonia and congestive cardiac failure in 3% each; nausea, dyspnea, increased blood creatinine levels, and increased blood uric acid levels in 1% each; and diarrhea in 0.4%. Grade 1/2 peripheral neuropathy was present in 77% of patients at baseline; new-onset neuropathy was infrequent, with grade 3 or lower neuropathy occurring in less than 1% of patients.2

Newly diagnosed MM

In an ongoing phase I/II trial, patients with newly diagnosed MM are receiving carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone.3 Carfilzomib is started at 20 mg/m2 (dose level 1) and increased to 27 mg/m2 (dose level 2) and 36 mg/m2 (dose level 3) given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 in 28-day cycles. Lenalidomide is given at 25 mg/d on days 1−21 in each cycle, and dexamethasone is given weekly at 40 mg during cycles 1−4 and at 20 mg during cycles 5−8. Patients with a partial response or better are eligible to proceed to stem cell collection and autologous stem cell transplantation after at least 4 cycles and can continue study treatment after transplantation. After completion of 8 cycles, patients are to receive maintenance cycles consisting of carfilzomib on days 1, 2, 15, and 16; lenalidomide on days 1−21; and weekly dexamethasone at doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. A planned 36 patients are to be treated at the carfilzomib maximum tolerated dose.

At the time of reporting, 24 patients had been enrolled, 4 at dose level 1, 14 at dose level 2, and 6 at dose level 3. Toxicity data were available for 21 patients, including 19 who completed at least 1 cycle of treatment. A single dose-limiting toxicity event was observed, consisting of nonfebrile neutropenia in a patient at dose level 2. The maximum tolerated dose had not yet been reached. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities consisted of neutropenia in three patients, thrombocytopenia in three patients, and anemia in one patient. Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicities included five cases of elevated blood glucose levels, deep vein thrombosis during aspirin prophylaxis in one patient, and fatigue in one patient. Emergent peripheral neuropathy was observed in two patients, who developed grade 1 neuropathy.
 

 

At the time of reporting, 23 patients continued on treatment, with 20 having no need for dose modifications. After a median of 4 months of treatment (range, 1−8 months), the preliminary response rate in 19 evaluable patients completing at least 1 cycle was 100% with at least a partial response, including 63% with a very good partial response and 37% with a complete response or near-complete response. Partial responses were observed in 17 of 19 patients after 1 cycle, with responses improving in all patients with continuing treatment. Seven patients had proceeded to stem cell collection using growth factors only after a median of 4 cycles, and all resumed study treatment after stem cell collection. No disease progression had been observed in any of the evaluable patients, and all remained alive.

References

1. Lacy MQ, Hayman SR, Gertz MA, et al. Pomalidomide (CC4047) plus low dose dexamethasone (Pom/dex) is active and well tolerated in lenalidomide refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Leukemia 2010;24:1934−1939.

2. Siegel DSD, Martin T, Wang M, et al. Results of PX-171-003-A1, an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:985.

3. Jakubowiak AJ, Dytfeld D, Jagannath S, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results of phase I/II MMRC trial. Blood 2010;116:862.

4. Singhal SB, Siegel DSD, Martin T, et al. Pooled safety analysis from phase 1 and 2 studies of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:1954.

What's new, what's important

Treatment of multiple myeloma is evolving rapidly. It is tough to keep up with the rapid pace of new drugs, updates, and changes in the standard of care. In this issue of Community Oncology we bring to you two new exciting drugs on the horizon, pomalidomide and carfilzomib. In addition to introducing these two new drugs, we have asked Dr. Noopur Raje to explain how she treats a newly diagnosed patient with multiple myeloma.

Pomalidomide, a thalidomide (Thalomid) analog, is a promising myeloma drug with encouraging responses in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients. Carfilzomib is a novel proteasome inhibitor. When combined with lenalidomide (Revlimid) in the first-line setting, it produced a 100% response rate. Phase III studies are in progress or being completed. It will be exciting to see the final results of these studies. 

With this issue we are changing the format of Community Translations to incorporate the mechanism of action or pathophysiology of some of these new advances so that a clinician can relate to them in a clinical setting. 

--Jame Abraham, MD, Editor

Two of the most promising drugs on the horizon for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are pomalidomide and carfilzomib. Both agents have shown significant single-agent activity in clinical trials. They seem to work in patients whose MM is resistant to other treatments and are being studied in combination regimens.

Pomalidomide

Pomalidomide is a new immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) with high in vitro potency. In initial experience with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed MM, Lacy and colleagues found an overall response rate of 63% and observed responses in some patients who were refractory to lenalidomide (Revlimid), suggesting an absence of cross-resistance between pomalidomide and other IMiDs. In a recently reported phase II study,1 these investigators assessed the combination of pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM, finding the combination to be highly active and well tolerated.

In this study, 34 patients with lenalidomide-refractory MM were treated with oral pomalidomide (2 mg daily) and dexamethasone (40 mg once weekly) in 28-day cycles. Patients had a median age of 61.5 years, 68% were male, 85% had an ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) performance status of 0 or 1, and 41% were categorized as high risk. The median time from diagnosis was 62 months. The median number of prior chemotherapy regimens was four. In addition to lenalidomide, 58% of patients had received prior thalidomide (Thalomid), and 59% had received prior bortezomib (Velcade); 68% of patients had undergone prior autologous stem cell transplantation, and 53% had prior radiation therapy. Twenty patients (59%) had peripheral neuropathy at baseline.

Patients received a median of 5 cycles (range, 1−14) of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism was given in 204 of 209 treatment cycles (aspirin in 150 cycles and warfarin in 54 cycles). Treatment responses consisted of a very good partial response in 9%, a partial response in 23%, and a minimal response in 15%, for an overall clinical benefit rate of 47%; 35% of patients had stable disease, and 18% had disease progression. The median time to response was 2 months. Response was observed in 8 of 14 (57%) high-risk patients, in 8 of 19 (42%) who received previous thalidomide treatment, and in 9 of 20 (45%) who were given previous bortezomib treatment. In eight patients with stable disease, the pomalidomide dose was increased to 4 mg/d, with one patient improving to a partial response. The median duration of response in 11 patients with a partial response or better was 9.1 months. The median progression-free survival was 4.8 months, and progression-free survival did not differ between high-risk and standard-risk patients. The median overall survival was 13.9 months. During follow-up, treatment was stopped due to disease progression in 23 patients, 3 withdrew from the study due to patient/physician discretion, and 8 continued to receive treatment. Seven patients died, all due to disease progression. The median follow-up of patients remaining alive was 8.3 months.

Pomalidomide/dexamethasone treatment was well tolerated. Toxicity consisted mostly of myelosuppression. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity at least possibly related to treatment occurred in 38% of patients, including neutropenia in 29%, anemia in 12%, and thrombocytopenia in 9%. The most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicity was fatigue, which occurred in 9% of patients (all grade 3); grade 3 pneumonitis, edema, pneumonia, and folliculitis were each observed in one patient. Nine patients (26%) had neuropathy during treatment (six grade 1, three grade 2); they included six patients with neuropathy at baseline, three of whom had a worsening of grade.
 

 

Carfilzomib

Carfilzomib is a highly selective epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor with minimal affinity for nontarget proteases. In a recent phase II trial in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, reported at the 2010 American Society of Hematology (ASH) meeting, carfilzomib produced durable responses and was well tolerated.2 An ongoing phase I/II trial assessing carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed MM, also reported at the 2010 ASH meeting, has shown good activity and tolerability of the regimen.3 A phase III trial comparing carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed MM has been initiated.

Relapsed/refractory MM

In the trial in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, 266 patients with multiply relapsed MM who had disease refractory to their last treatment received carfilzomib (20 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16) every 28 days for the first cycle, with the dose then being escalated to 27 mg/m2 on the same schedule for up to 12 cycles.2 Prior therapies included bortezomib, either lenalidomide or thalidomide, and an alkylating agent. Patients had a median duration of MM of 5.4 years and had received a median of 5 prior lines of chemotherapy and a median of 13 antimyeloma treatments; prior treatments included bortezomib in 99.6% of patients (a median of two prior regimens containing bortezomib), lenalidomide in 94%, thalidomide in 74%, corticosteroids in 98%, alkylating agents in 91%, and stem cell transplantation in 74%. Overall, 65% of patients were refractory to bortezomib prior to study entry.

At the time of reporting, 79 patients (30%) had completed at least 6 cycles of study treatment, approximately 11% had completed 12 cycles (with most entering an extension phase of the study), and 15 patients remained on study (all with more than 10 cycles of study treatment). Among 257 patients evaluable for response, 0.4% (one patient) had a complete response, 4.7% had a very good partial response, and 19% had a partial response, for an overall response rate of 24%; an additional 12% of patients had a minimal response, yielding an overall clinical benefit rate of 36%. Stable disease for at least 6 weeks was achieved in 32%. Among patients with a partial response or better, the median duration of response was 7.4 months. Among patients with a minimal response, the median duration of response was 6.3 months, indicating durable minor responses.

Toxicity consisted mainly of myelosuppression. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities consisted of thrombocytopenia in 18% of patients, lymphopenia in 11%, neutropenia in 8%, and anemia in 7%.4 Grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included fatigue in 6% of patients; pneumonia and congestive cardiac failure in 3% each; nausea, dyspnea, increased blood creatinine levels, and increased blood uric acid levels in 1% each; and diarrhea in 0.4%. Grade 1/2 peripheral neuropathy was present in 77% of patients at baseline; new-onset neuropathy was infrequent, with grade 3 or lower neuropathy occurring in less than 1% of patients.2

Newly diagnosed MM

In an ongoing phase I/II trial, patients with newly diagnosed MM are receiving carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone.3 Carfilzomib is started at 20 mg/m2 (dose level 1) and increased to 27 mg/m2 (dose level 2) and 36 mg/m2 (dose level 3) given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 in 28-day cycles. Lenalidomide is given at 25 mg/d on days 1−21 in each cycle, and dexamethasone is given weekly at 40 mg during cycles 1−4 and at 20 mg during cycles 5−8. Patients with a partial response or better are eligible to proceed to stem cell collection and autologous stem cell transplantation after at least 4 cycles and can continue study treatment after transplantation. After completion of 8 cycles, patients are to receive maintenance cycles consisting of carfilzomib on days 1, 2, 15, and 16; lenalidomide on days 1−21; and weekly dexamethasone at doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. A planned 36 patients are to be treated at the carfilzomib maximum tolerated dose.

At the time of reporting, 24 patients had been enrolled, 4 at dose level 1, 14 at dose level 2, and 6 at dose level 3. Toxicity data were available for 21 patients, including 19 who completed at least 1 cycle of treatment. A single dose-limiting toxicity event was observed, consisting of nonfebrile neutropenia in a patient at dose level 2. The maximum tolerated dose had not yet been reached. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities consisted of neutropenia in three patients, thrombocytopenia in three patients, and anemia in one patient. Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicities included five cases of elevated blood glucose levels, deep vein thrombosis during aspirin prophylaxis in one patient, and fatigue in one patient. Emergent peripheral neuropathy was observed in two patients, who developed grade 1 neuropathy.
 

 

At the time of reporting, 23 patients continued on treatment, with 20 having no need for dose modifications. After a median of 4 months of treatment (range, 1−8 months), the preliminary response rate in 19 evaluable patients completing at least 1 cycle was 100% with at least a partial response, including 63% with a very good partial response and 37% with a complete response or near-complete response. Partial responses were observed in 17 of 19 patients after 1 cycle, with responses improving in all patients with continuing treatment. Seven patients had proceeded to stem cell collection using growth factors only after a median of 4 cycles, and all resumed study treatment after stem cell collection. No disease progression had been observed in any of the evaluable patients, and all remained alive.

References

1. Lacy MQ, Hayman SR, Gertz MA, et al. Pomalidomide (CC4047) plus low dose dexamethasone (Pom/dex) is active and well tolerated in lenalidomide refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Leukemia 2010;24:1934−1939.

2. Siegel DSD, Martin T, Wang M, et al. Results of PX-171-003-A1, an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:985.

3. Jakubowiak AJ, Dytfeld D, Jagannath S, et al. Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results of phase I/II MMRC trial. Blood 2010;116:862.

4. Singhal SB, Siegel DSD, Martin T, et al. Pooled safety analysis from phase 1 and 2 studies of carfilzomib (CFZ) in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Blood 2010;116:1954.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Pomalidomide in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma and carfilzomib in refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
Display Headline
Pomalidomide in lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma and carfilzomib in refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article