Minimal residual disease (MRD) is one of the most important prognostic factors in multiple myeloma (MM) and a valid surrogate for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Recently, MRD negativity was approved as an early clinical endpoint for accelerated drug approval in MM. Nevertheless, there is limited evidence of MRD utility in real-world setting. In this retrospective multicenter study, we report outcomes of 331 newly diagnosed MM patients with MRD evaluation at Day+100 after autologous stem cell transplantation using flow cytometry with a median limit of detection of 0.001%. MRD negativity was reached in 47% of patients and was associated with significantly prolonged median PFS (49.2 months vs. 18.4 months; hazard ratios (HR) = 0.37; p < 0.001) and OS (not reached vs. 74.9 months; HR = 0.50; p = 0.007). Achieving MRD negativity was associated with PFS improvements regardless of age, International Staging System (ISS) stage, lactate dedydrogenase (LDH) level, or cytogenetic risk. Importantly, MRD positive patients benefited from lenalidomide maintenance versus no maintenance (18-months PFS: 81% vs. 46%; HR = 0.24; p = 0.002) while in MRD negative patients such benefit was not observed (p = 0.747). The outcomes of our real-world study recapitulate results from clinical trials including meta-analyses and support the idea that MRD positive patients profit more from lenalidomide maintenance than MRD negative ones.

• Klíčová slova
• lenalidomide maintenance, minimal residual disease (MRD), multiparameter flow cytometry, multiple myeloma, overall survival (OS), progression‐free survival (PFS), real‐world,
• MeSH
• autologní transplantace MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• lenalidomid aplikace a dávkování   terapeutické užití   MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mnohočetný myelom * diagnóza   mortalita   terapie   patologie   MeSH
• prognóza MeSH
• průtoková cytometrie * metody   MeSH
• retrospektivní studie MeSH
• reziduální nádor * diagnóza   MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• staging nádorů MeSH
• transplantace hematopoetických kmenových buněk metody   MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• multicentrická studie MeSH
• Názvy látek
• lenalidomid MeSH

• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

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.

• MeSH
• doba přežití bez progrese choroby MeSH
• dvojitá slepá metoda MeSH
• glycin škodlivé účinky   analogy a deriváty   terapeutické užití   MeSH
• inhibitory proteasomu škodlivé účinky   terapeutické užití   MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mnohočetný myelom farmakoterapie   MeSH
• placebo MeSH
• protinádorové látky škodlivé účinky   terapeutické užití   MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• sloučeniny boru škodlivé účinky   terapeutické užití   MeSH
• transplantace kmenových buněk MeSH
• udržovací chemoterapie MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• klinické zkoušky, fáze III MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
• Názvy látek
• glycin MeSH
• inhibitory proteasomu MeSH
• ixazomib MeSH Prohlížeč
• placebo MeSH
• protinádorové látky MeSH
• sloučeniny boru MeSH

The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled TOURMALINE-MM3 study (NCT02181413) demonstrated improved progression-free survival with ixazomib maintenance versus placebo post autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in multiple myeloma patients. We report additional safety data from TOURMALINE-MM3 to inform adverse event (AE) management recommendations. Patients were randomized 3:2 to receive ixazomib (n = 395) or placebo (n = 261) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles for ~ 2 years or until progressive disease/toxicity. The initial 3-mg ixazomib dose was escalated to 4 mg in cycle 5, if tolerated in cycles 1-4. Safety was a secondary endpoint assessed in all treated patients; AEs were graded using Common Terminology Criteria for AEs v4.03. The rate of grade ≥ 3 AEs was higher in the ixazomib arm (19%) than in the placebo arm (5%), but the rate of discontinuation due to AEs was similar (7% vs. 5%). For AEs of clinical interest, rates were higher with ixazomib versus placebo: nausea 39% versus 15%, vomiting 27% versus 11%, diarrhea 35% versus 24%, thrombocytopenia 13% versus 3%, and peripheral neuropathy 19% versus 15%. However, the majority of events were low-grade, manageable with supportive therapy or dose reduction, and reversible, and did not result in discontinuation. There was no evidence of cumulative, long-term, or late-onset toxicity with ixazomib maintenance. Ixazomib is an efficacious and tolerable option for post-ASCT maintenance. AEs associated with ixazomib maintenance can be managed in the context of routine post-ASCT supportive care due to the limited additional toxicity. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02181413.

• Klíčová slova
• Adverse events, Ixazomib, Maintenance therapy, Multiple myeloma, Safety,
• MeSH
• autologní štěp MeSH
• glycin aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   analogy a deriváty   MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• míra přežití MeSH
• mnohočetný myelom * mortalita   terapie   MeSH
• následné studie MeSH
• přežití bez známek nemoci MeSH
• protokoly protinádorové kombinované chemoterapie aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• silikáty aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• sloučeniny boru aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• transplantace kmenových buněk * MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• multicentrická studie MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH
• Názvy látek
• glycin MeSH
• ixazomib MeSH Prohlížeč
• silikáty MeSH
• sloučeniny boru MeSH
• tourmaline MeSH Prohlížeč

: We conducted a pooled analysis of two phase III trials, RV-MM-EMN-441 and EMN01, to compare maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone vs. lenalidomide in newly diagnosed transplant-eligible and -ineligible myeloma patients. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival, progression-free survival 2 and overall survival with both regimens. A secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of duration of maintenance on overall survival and on outcome after relapse. A total of 625 patients (lenalidomide-prednisone arm, n = 315; lenalidomide arm, n = 310) were analyzed. The median follow-up was 58 months. Median progression-free survival (25 vs. 19 months; p = 0.08), progression-free survival 2 (56 vs. 49 months; p = 0.9) and overall survival (73 months vs. NR; p = 0.08) were not significantly different between the two arms. Toxicity profiles of lenalidomide-prednisone and lenalidomide were similar, with the exception of neutropenia that was higher in the lenalidomide arm (grade ≥ 3: 9% vs. 19%, p < 0.001), without an increase in the rate of infections. Overall survival (median NR vs. 49 months, p < 0.001), progression-free survival from relapse (median 35 vs. 24 months, p = 0.004) and overall survival from relapse (median not reached vs. 41 months, p = 0.002) were significantly longer in patients continuing maintenance for ≥2 years. We showed that the addition of prednisone at 25 or 50 mg every other day (eod) to lenalidomide maintenance did not induce any significant advantage.

• Klíčová slova
• lenalidomide, maintenance, multiple myeloma, newly diagnosed, prednisone,
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

The introduction of new agents and management strategies over the past decade has resulted in a major step change in treatment outcomes with deepening responses and increased survival for patients with multiple myeloma. In daily clinical practice, healthcare professionals are now faced with challenges including, optimal treatment sequencing and changing treatment goals. In light of this, a group of experts met to discuss diagnostic and treatment guidelines, examine current clinical practice, and consider how new clinical trial data may be integrated into the management of multiple myeloma in the future.

• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• přehledy MeSH

Substantial improvements in survival have been seen in multiple myeloma (MM) over recent years, associated with the introduction and widespread use of multiple novel agents and regimens, as well as the emerging treatment paradigm of continuous or long-term therapy. However, these therapies and approaches may have limitations in the community setting, associated with toxicity burden, patient burden, and other factors including cost. Consequently, despite improvements in efficacy in the rigorously controlled clinical trials setting, the same results are not always achieved in real-world practice. Furthermore, the large number of different treatment options and regimens under investigation in various MM settings precludes the feasibility of obtaining head-to-head clinical trial data, and there is a temptation to use cross-trial comparisons to evaluate data across regimens. However, multiple aspects, including patient-related, disease-related, and treatment-related factors, can influence clinical trial outcomes and lead to differences between studies that may confound direct comparisons between data. In this review, we explore the various factors requiring attention when evaluating clinical trial data across available agents/regimens, as well as other considerations that may impact the translation of these findings into everyday MM management. We also investigate discrepancies between clinical trial efficacy and real-world effectiveness through a literature review of non-clinical trial data in relapsed/refractory MM on novel agent-based regimens and evaluate these data in the context of phase 3 trial results for recently approved and commonly used regimens. We thereby demonstrate the complexity of interpreting data across clinical studies in MM, as well as between clinical studies and routine-care analyses, with the aim to help clinicians consider all the necessary issues when tailoring individual patients' treatment approaches.

• MeSH
• disparity zdravotní péče MeSH
• interpretace statistických dat * MeSH
• klinické zkoušky jako téma * MeSH
• komorbidita MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mnohočetný myelom diagnóza   epidemiologie   mortalita   terapie   MeSH
• prognóza MeSH
• staging nádorů MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• výzkumný projekt MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• přehledy MeSH

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

• MeSH
• klinické zkoušky, fáze III jako téma MeSH
• lenalidomid aplikace a dávkování   MeSH
• mnohočetný myelom diagnóza   farmakoterapie   MeSH
• přežití bez známek nemoci MeSH
• protokoly protinádorové kombinované chemoterapie terapeutické užití   MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie jako téma MeSH
• síťová metaanalýza MeSH
• udržovací chemoterapie metody   MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• metaanalýza MeSH
• systematický přehled MeSH
• Názvy látek
• lenalidomid MeSH

Survival of myeloma patients has greatly improved with the use of autologous stem cell transplantation and novel agents, such as proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs and monoclonal antibodies. Compared to bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based regimens alone, the addition of high-dose melphalan followed by autologous transplantation significantly improves progression-free survival, although an overall survival benefit was not observed in all trials. Moreover, follow up of recent trials is still too short to show any difference in survival. In the light of these findings, novel agent-based induction followed by autologous transplantation is considered the standard upfront treatment for eligible patients (level of evidence: 1A). Post-transplant consolidation and maintenance treatment can further improve patient outcome (1A). The availability of several novel agents has led to the development of multiple combination regimens such as salvage treatment options. In this context, the role of salvage autologous transplantation and allotransplant has not been extensively evaluated. In the case of prolonged remission after upfront autologous transplantation, another autologous transplantation at relapse can be considered (2B). Patients who experience early relapse and/or have high-risk features have a poor prognosis and may be considered as candidates for clinical trials that, in young and fit patients, may also include an allograft in combination with novel agents (2B). Ongoing studies are evaluating the role of novel cellular therapies, such as inclusion of antibody-based triplets and quadruplets, and chimeric antigen receptor-T cells. Despite encouraging preliminary results, longer follow up and larger patient numbers are needed before the clinical use of these novel therapies can be widely recommended.

• MeSH
• autologní transplantace metody   MeSH
• imunoterapie adoptivní metody   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mnohočetný myelom terapie   MeSH
• směrnice pro lékařskou praxi jako téma MeSH
• transplantace hematopoetických kmenových buněk metody   MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• záchranná terapie přístrojové vybavení   metody   MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH
• přehledy MeSH
• Geografické názvy
• Evropa MeSH