Bortezomib, low-dose intravenous melphalan, and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma.

Department of Haematology, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK.
British Journal of Haematology (Impact Factor: 4.96). 03/2009; 144(6):887-94. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2008.07572.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This multicenter phase I/II study investigated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of low dose intravenous (IV) melphalan in combination with bortezomib for patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Patients received bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 and escalating doses of IV melphalan (2.5-10.0 mg/m(2)) on day 2 of a 28-day cycle for a maximum of eight cycles. Dexamethasone 20 mg was added for progressive or stable disease. Fifty-three patients were enrolled. The MTD was defined at melphalan 7.5 mg/m(2) and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2). The overall response rate (ORR) was 68% (23% complete or near-complete responses [CR/nCR]) whilst at the MTD (n = 33) the ORR was 76% (34% CR/nCR). After median follow-up of 17 months, the median progression free survival was 10 months, rising to 12 months at the MTD (P < 0.05 vs. non-MTD regimens). The median overall survival was 28 months, but was not yet reached at the MTD. Grade 3/4 adverse events included thrombocytopenia (62%), neutropenia (57%), infection (21%), and neuropathy (15%). Bortezomib and low-dose IV melphalan combination therapy is a safe and highly effective regimen for patients with relapsed MM. These data suggest further investigation of this combination is warranted.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Bone disease is present in the majority of patients with multiple myeloma and can seriously affect quality of life and survival rate. In addition to suppression of osteoclastogenesis, there have been developments made in terms of the therapeutic agents available, such as novel immunomodulating agents, proteasome and receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand inhibitors. Areas covered: Areas covered include in vitro, in vivo and clinical evidence was collected using MEDLINE® (1950 - May 2014), EMBASE (1980 - May 2014) and Google Scholar (1980 - May 2014) databases. Expert opinion: Bisphosphonates are the mainstay of myeloma bone disease treatment. Oral clodronate and intravenous pamidronate and zoledronic acid are currently used drugs and seem to have comparable results in preventing skeletal-related events of the disease. Zoledronate can also have survival benefits and based on the available evidence is the superior bisphosphonate; however, its side effects have to be monitored. Denosumab had comparable results with zoledronate on myeloma bone disease treatment; its use has not been completely proven yet. There is an expanding set of drugs, proteasome inhibitors, under investigation with great potential to reduce the negative effects of myeloma cells on bone. Future clinical studies should compare both the catabolic and anabolic effects of these agents on bone.
    Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 11/2014; 15(2):1-18. DOI:10.1517/14712598.2015.978853 · 3.65 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The PAD regime, composed of bortezomib, adriamycin and dexamethasone, improves the outcomes of patients with advanced multiple myeloma (MM), but at the same time produces high frequency of serious toxic side effects. For the first time, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of a bortezomib-dose-reduced PAD regime in the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM in this clinical study. Forty-five patients were treated with two to six 21-day cycles of PAD, comprising bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m(2) (P1AD, n = 21) or 1.0 mg/m(2) (P2AD, n = 24) (days 1, 4, 8, 11), adriamycin at 9 mg/m(2) (days 1-4) and dexamethasone at 40 mg/day (days 1-4). Overall, 36 patients (80 %) showed at least partial remission (PR), in which 9 cases (20 %) showed complete remission (CR) and 10 cases (22 %) showed very good partial remission (VGPR). The efficacy of PAD regimen in advanced MM patients was not related to the traditional prognostic factors. There was no significant difference between P1AD and P2AD in the rates of PR, CR or VGPR, 1.5-year progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) (81 % vs. 79 %, 48 % vs. 38 %, 64 % vs. 59 %, and 85 % vs. 73 %, respectively). However, the grade 3-4 toxic effects, including thrombocytopenia (13 % vs. 38 %), peripheral neuropathy (8 % vs. 33 %) and 3-4 grade gastrointestinal reaction (13 % vs. 43 %), were markedly inhibited after P2AD compared to P1AD (P < 0.05). The bortezomib-dose-reduced PAD regime reduced the incidence of adverse reactions without affecting the treatment efficacy in patients with advanced MM.
    Pathology & Oncology Research 06/2014; DOI:10.1007/s12253-014-9785-7 · 1.81 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: New treatment options for patients with myeloma have helped to change the natural history of this disease, even in the context of relapsed disease. For standard-risk patients, doublet-based therapy may offer benefit, whereas for patients with aggressive or genetically high-risk disease combinations of agents are needed for adequate disease control. Second-generation agents offer significant activity for patients with refractory myeloma, and new categories of agents provide new targets for future study and clinical use. Combinations of these agents in selected patient populations represent the next stage in the quest to cure myeloma.
    Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America 10/2014; 28(5). DOI:10.1016/j.hoc.2014.06.008 · 2.07 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Oct 6, 2014