Medicine (St Vincent's) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 32
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableP14: DREAMM-9: PHASE I STUDY OF BELANTAMAB MAFODOTIN PLUS STANDARD OF CARE IN PATIENTS WITH TRANSPLANT-INELIGIBLE NEWLY DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA(Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), 2022)
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableASTCT Clinical Practice Recommendations for Transplantation and Cellular Therapies in Multiple Myeloma(ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2022-06-01)Over the past decade, therapeutic options in multiple myeloma (MM) have changed dramatically. Given the unprecedented efficacy of novel agents, the role of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in MM remains under scrutiny. Rapid advances in myeloma immunotherapy including the recent approval of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy will impact the MM therapeutic landscape. The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy convened an expert panel to formulate clinical practice recommendations for role, timing, and sequencing of autologous (auto-HCT), allogeneic (allo-HCT) and CAR T-cell therapy for patients with newly diagnosed (NDMM) and relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements. Twenty consensus statements were generated. The panel endorsed continued use of auto-HCT consolidation for patients with NDMM as a standard-of-care option, whereas in the front line allo-HCT and CAR-T were not recommended outside the setting of clinical trial. For patients not undergoing auto-HCT upfront, the panel recommended its use in first relapse. Lenalidomide as a single agent was recommended for maintenance especially for standard risk patients. In the RRMM setting, the panel recommended the use of CAR-T in patients with 4 or more prior lines of therapy. The panel encouraged allo-HCT in RRMM setting only in the context of clinical trial. The panel found RAND-modified Delphi methodology effective in providing a formal framework for developing consensus recommendations for the timing and sequence of cellular therapies for MM.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableDaratumumab as first line therapy in primary effusion lymphoma: a case report(AME Publishing Company, 2021-12-01)
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableDaratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MAIA): overall survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial(ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2021-11-01)BACKGROUND: In the primary analysis of the phase 3 MAIA trial (median follow-up 28·0 months), a significant improvement in progression-free survival was observed with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone in transplantation-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here, we report the updated efficacy and safety results from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival. METHODS: MAIA is an ongoing, multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial that enrolled patients at 176 hospitals in 14 countries across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2, and were ineligible for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation because of their age (≥65 years) or comorbidities. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using randomly permuted blocks (block size 4) by an interactive web response system to receive 28-day cycles of intravenous daratumumab (16 mg/kg, once per week during cycles 1-2, once every 2 weeks in cycles 3-6, and once every 4 weeks thereafter) plus oral lenalidomide (25 mg on days 1-21 of each cycle) and oral dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle; daratumumab group) or lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). Randomisation was stratified by International Staging System disease stage, geographical region, and age. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, which was centrally assessed, and a secondary endpoint was overall survival (both assessed in the intention-to-treat population). The safety population included patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. The results presented here are from a prespecified interim analysis for overall survival, for which the prespecified stopping boundary was p=0·0414. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02252172. FINDINGS: Between March 18, 2015, and Jan 15, 2017, 952 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 737 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the daratumumab group (n=368) or the control group (n=369). At a median follow-up of 56·2 months (IQR 52·7-59·9), median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI 54·8-not reached) in the daratumumab group versus 34·4 months (29·6-39·2) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53 [95% CI 0·43-0·66]; p<0·0001). Median overall survival was not reached in either group (daratumumab group, 95% CI not reached-not reached; control group, 95% CI 55·7-not reached; HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·53-0·86]; p=0·0013). The most common (>15%) grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (197 [54%] patients in the daratumumab group vs 135 [37%] patients in the control group), pneumonia (70 [19%] vs 39 [11%]), anaemia (61 [17%] vs 79 [22%]), and lymphopenia (60 [16%] vs 41 [11%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 281 (77%) patients in the daratumumab group and 257 (70%) patients in the control group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 13 (4%) patients in the daratumumab group and ten (3%) patients in the control group. INTERPRETATION: Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone increased overall survival and progression-free survival in patients ineligible for stem-cell transplantation with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. There were no new safety concerns. Our results support the frontline use of daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for transplantation. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailablePlanned withdrawal of dexamethasone after pomalidomide low-dose dexamethasone induction for lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma (ALLG MM14)(FERRATA STORTI FOUNDATION, 2022-01-01)
-
ItemPembrolizumab plus dinaciclib in patients with hematologic malignancies: the phase 1b KEYNOTE-155 study(ELSEVIER, 2022-02-22)Preclinical data demonstrated that combining an anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor with a cyclin-dependent kinase 9 (CDK9) inhibitor provided enhanced antitumor activity with no significant toxicities, suggesting this combination may be a potential therapeutic option. The multicohort, phase 1 KEYNOTE-155 study evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab plus the CDK9 inhibitor dinaciclib in patients with relapsed or refractory (rr) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and multiple myeloma (MM). Patients enrolled were ≥18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of CLL, DLBCL, or MM. The study included 2 phases: a dose-evaluation phase to determine dose-limiting toxicities and a signal-detection phase. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus dinaciclib 7 mg/m2 on day 1 and 10 mg/m2 on day 8 of cycle 1 and 14 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of cycles 2 and later. Primary endpoint was safety, and a key secondary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Seventy-two patients were enrolled and received ≥1 dose of study treatment (CLL, n = 17; DLBCL, n = 38; MM, n = 17). Pembrolizumab plus dinaciclib was generally well tolerated and produced no unexpected toxicities. The ORRs were 29.4% (5/17, rrCLL), 21.1% (8/38, rrDLBCL), and 0% (0/17, rrMM), respectively. At data cutoff, all 72 patients had discontinued treatment, 38 (52.8%) because of progressive disease. These findings demonstrate activity with combination pembrolizumab plus dinaciclib and suggest that a careful and comprehensive approach to explore anti-PD-1 and CDK9 inhibitor combinations is warranted. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02684617.
-
ItemDaratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: frailty subgroup analysis of MAIA(SPRINGERNATURE, 2022-01-02)In the phase 3 MAIA study of patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), daratumumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (D-Rd) improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd). We present a subgroup analysis of MAIA by frailty status. Frailty assessment was performed retrospectively using age, Charlson comorbidity index, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Patients were classified as fit, intermediate, non-frail (fit + intermediate), or frail. Of the randomized patients (D-Rd, n = 368; Rd, n = 369), 396 patients were non-frail (D-Rd, 196 [53.3%]; Rd, 200 [54.2%]) and 341 patients were frail (172 [46.7%]; 169 [45.8%]). After a 36.4-month median follow-up, non-frail patients had longer PFS than frail patients, but the PFS benefit of D-Rd versus Rd was maintained across subgroups: non-frail (median, not reached [NR] vs 41.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; P < 0.0001) and frail (NR vs 30.4 months; HR, 0.62; P = 0.003). Improved rates of complete response or better and minimal residual disease (10-5) negativity were observed for D-Rd across subgroups. The most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse event in non-frail and frail patients was neutropenia (non-frail, 45.4% [D-Rd] and 37.2% [Rd]; frail, 57.7% and 33.1%). These findings support the clinical benefit of D-Rd in transplant-ineligible NDMM patients enrolled in MAIA, regardless of frailty status.
-
ItemOral ixazomib-dexamethasone vs oral pomalidomide-dexamethasone for lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed multiple myeloma: a randomized Phase 2 trial(SPRINGERNATURE, 2022-01-24)Multiple myeloma (MM) patients typically receive several lines of combination therapy and first-line treatment commonly includes lenalidomide. As patients age, they become less tolerant to treatment, requiring convenient/tolerable/lenalidomide-free options. Carfilzomib and/or bortezomib-exposed/intolerant, lenalidomide-refractory MM patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy were randomized 3:2 to ixazomib-dexamethasone (ixa-dex) (n = 73) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (pom-dex) (n = 49) until progression/toxicity. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.1 vs 4.8 months with ixa-dex vs pom-dex (HR 0.847, 95% CI 0.535-1.341, P = 0.477; median follow-up: 15.3 vs 17.3 months); there was no statistically significant difference between arms. In patients with 2 and ≥3 prior lines of therapy, respectively, mPFS was 11.0 vs 5.7 months (HR 1.083, 95% CI 0.547-2.144) and 5.7 vs 3.7 months (HR 0.686, 95% CI 0.368-1.279). Among ixa-dex vs pom-dex patients, 69% vs 81% had Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), 51% vs 53% had serious TEAEs, 39% vs 36% had TEAEs leading to drug discontinuation, 44% vs 32% had TEAEs leading to dose reduction, and 13% vs 13% died on study. Quality of life was similar between arms and maintained during treatment. Ixa-dex represents an important lenalidomide-free, oral option for this heavily pretreated, lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed population.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03170882.
-
ItemIxazomib as Postinduction Maintenance for Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Not Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation: The Phase III TOURMALINE-MM4 Trial(AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2020-12-01)PURPOSE: Maintenance therapy prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) not undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) but has generally been limited to immunomodulatory agents. Other options that complement the induction regimen with favorable toxicity are needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled TOURMALINE-MM4 study randomly assigned (3:2) patients with NDMM not undergoing ASCT who achieved better than or equal to partial response after 6-12 months of standard induction therapy to receive the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib or placebo on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles as maintenance for 24 months. The primary endpoint was PFS since time of randomization. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive ixazomib (n = 425) or placebo (n = 281). TOURMALINE-MM4 met its primary endpoint with a 34.1% reduction in risk of progression or death with ixazomib versus placebo (median PFS since randomization, 17.4 v 9.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.659; 95% CI, 0.542 to 0.801; P < .001; median follow-up, 21.1 months). Ixazomib significantly benefitted patients who achieved complete or very good partial response postinduction (median PFS, 25.6 v 12.9 months; HR, 0.586; P < .001). With ixazomib versus placebo, 36.6% versus 23.2% of patients had grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); 12.9% versus 8.0% discontinued treatment because of TEAEs. Common any-grade TEAEs included nausea (26.8% v 8.0%), vomiting (24.2% v 4.3%), and diarrhea (23.2% v 12.3%). There was no increase in new primary malignancies (5.2% v 6.2%); rates of on-study deaths were 2.6% versus 2.2%. CONCLUSION: Ixazomib maintenance prolongs PFS with no unexpected toxicity in patients with NDMM not undergoing ASCT. To our knowledge, this is the first PI demonstrated in a randomized clinical trial to have single-agent efficacy for maintenance and is the first oral PI option in this patient population.
-
ItemPhase I Study of Venetoclax Plus Daratumumab and Dexamethasone, With or Without Bortezomib, in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma With and Without t(11;14)(LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS, 2021-11-10)PURPOSE: Venetoclax is an oral BCL-2 inhibitor with single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) with t(11;14) translocation. Venetoclax efficacy in RRMM may be potentiated through combination with agents including bortezomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab. METHODS: This phase I study (NCT03314181) evaluated venetoclax with daratumumab and dexamethasone (VenDd) in patients with t(11;14) RRMM and VenDd with bortezomib (VenDVd) in cytogenetically unselected patients with RRMM. Primary objectives included expansion-phase dosing, safety, and overall response rate. Secondary objectives included further safety analysis, progression-free survival, duration of response, time to progression, and minimal residual disease negativity. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were enrolled, 24 each in parts 1 (VenDd) and 2 (VenDVd). There was one dose-limiting toxicity in part 1 (grade 3 febrile neutropenia, 800 mg VenDd). Common adverse events with VenDd and VenDVd included diarrhea (63% and 54%) and nausea (50% and 50%); grade ≥ 3 adverse events were observed in 88% in the VenDd group and 71% in the VenDVd group. One treatment-emergent death occurred in part 2 (sepsis) in the context of progressive disease, with no other infection-related deaths on study with medians of 20.9 and 20.4 months of follow-up in parts 1 and 2, respectively. The overall response rate was 96% with VenDd (all very good partial response or better [≥ VGPR]) and 92% with VenDVd (79% ≥ VGPR). The 18-month progression-free survival rate was 90.5% (95% CI, 67.0 to 97.5) with VenDd and 66.7% (95% CI, 42.5 to 82.5) with VenDVd. CONCLUSION: VenDd and VenDVd produced a high rate of deep and durable responses in patients with RRMM. These results support continued evaluation of venetoclax with daratumumab regimens to treat RRMM, particularly in those with t(11;14).