RESUMEN
The introduction of novel antimyeloma therapies, including thalidomide, lenalidomide, and bortezomib, has expanded treatment options for patients with this disease. These compounds have altered the natural history of multiple myeloma, resulting in substantial improvements in patient outcomes. However, like with any other drug, their use is associated with a specific toxicity profile. The major adverse events (AEs) associated with lenalidomide include: hematological toxicities (myelosuppression), mainly neutropenia, venous thromboembolism, gastrointestinal disturbance, skin toxicity, atrial fibrillation, asthenia, and decreased peripheral blood stem cell yield during stem cell collection when lenalidomide is used after a long period of time. These AEs are predictable, consistent, and manageable with patient monitoring, supportive care, and dose adjustment. In this article, using three clinical cases as examples, we discuss the diagnoses and management of the most frequent AEs associated with lenalidomide treatment in patients with multiple myeloma.
Asunto(s)
Insuficiencia Suprarrenal/inducido químicamente , Astenia/inducido químicamente , Enfermedades Hematológicas/inducido químicamente , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Talidomida/análogos & derivados , Tromboembolia Venosa/inducido químicamente , Insuficiencia Suprarrenal/tratamiento farmacológico , Insuficiencia Suprarrenal/fisiopatología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Astenia/fisiopatología , Astenia/terapia , Proteína de Bence Jones/orina , Calcio/sangre , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Cálculo de Dosificación de Drogas , Femenino , Enfermedades Hematológicas/fisiopatología , Enfermedades Hematológicas/terapia , Humanos , Lenalidomida , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Monitoreo Fisiológico , Mieloma Múltiple/diagnóstico por imagen , Mieloma Múltiple/metabolismo , Mieloma Múltiple/fisiopatología , Selección de Paciente , Radiografía , Talidomida/administración & dosificación , Talidomida/efectos adversos , Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tromboembolia Venosa/fisiopatología , Tromboembolia Venosa/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The role of re-treatment with rituximab in aggressive B-cell lymphomas still needs to be defined. This study evaluated the influence of prior exposure to rituximab on response rates and survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab plus etoposide, cytarabine, cisplatinum and methylprednisolone (R-ESHAP). DESIGN AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 163 patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who received R-ESHAP as salvage therapy with a curative purpose. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether rituximab had been administered (n=94, "R+" group) or not (n=69, "R-" group) prior to R-ESHAP. RESULTS: Response rates were significantly higher in the R- group in the univariate but not in the multivariate analysis. In the analysis restricted to the R+ group, we observed very low complete remission and overall response rates in patients with primary refractory disease (8% and 33%, respectively), as compared to those in patients who were in first partial remission (41% and 86%) or who had relapsed disease (50% and 75%) (p<0.01 in both cases). Overall, 60% and 65% of patients in the R+ and R- groups, respectively, underwent stem-cell transplantation after the salvage therapy. With a median follow-up of 29 months (range, 6-84), patients in the R+ group had significantly worse progression-free survival (17% vs. 57% at 3 years, p<0.0001) and overall survival (38% v 67% at 3 years, p=0.0005) than patients in the R- group. Prior exposure to rituximab was also an independent adverse prognostic factor for both progression-free survival (RR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.2-3.3, p=0.008) and overall survival (RR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.3-3.9, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: R-ESHAP was associated with a high response rate in patients who were not refractory to upfront rituximab-based chemotherapy. However, the survival outcome was poor for patients previously exposed to rituximab, as compared to in those who had not previously been treated with rituximab.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso/tratamiento farmacológico , Terapia Recuperativa/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales de Origen Murino , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Citarabina/administración & dosificación , Dexametasona/administración & dosificación , Etopósido/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Rituximab , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: New treatment options offering enhanced activity in elderly, newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma are required. One strategy is to combine melphalan and prednisone with novel agents. We previously reported an 89% response rate, including 32% complete responses and 11% near complete responses, in our phase 1/2 study of bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone (VMP) in 60 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients with a median age of 75 years. Here, we report updated time-to-events data and the impact of poor prognosis factors on outcome. DESIGN AND METHODS: Updated analyses of time to biochemical progression and overall survival with VMP were conducted, and compared with those of historical controls treated with melphalan and prednisone. A univariate analysis was performed to evaluate the influence of known prognostic factors on the time to progression. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 26 months, the median time to progression with VMP was 27.2 months, compared with 20.0 months with melphalan plus prednisone. The median overall survival with VMP was not reached versus 26 months with melphalan and prednisone; the survival rate at 38 months was 85% versus 38%, respectively. Time to progression was not significantly affected by elevated beta(2)-microglobulin or lactate dehydrogenase levels, advanced age, or cytogenetic abnormalities, but was shorter in patients with albumin < 3 g/dL, Karnofsky performance status < or =70%, bone marrow plasma cell infiltration > or =40%, and, particularly, high plasma cell proliferative activity (> or = 2.5% S-phase cells). CONCLUSIONS: VMP is highly active and well tolerated in elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, with 85% of patients alive at 3 years. Moreover, VMP may overcome the poor prognostic impact of various factors, particularly cytogenetic abnormalities.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Mieloma Múltiple/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Biomarcadores de Tumor/análisis , Ácidos Borónicos/administración & dosificación , Ácidos Borónicos/efectos adversos , Bortezomib , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Enfermedades Gastrointestinales/inducido químicamente , Enfermedades Hematológicas/inducido químicamente , Humanos , Estado de Ejecución de Karnofsky , Masculino , Melfalán/administración & dosificación , Melfalán/efectos adversos , Mieloma Múltiple/genética , Mieloma Múltiple/mortalidad , Prednisona/administración & dosificación , Prednisona/efectos adversos , Pronóstico , Pirazinas/administración & dosificación , Pirazinas/efectos adversos , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: This is the first study in which bortezomib and dexamethasone were administered on an alternating basis as up-front therapy in multiple myeloma (MM). We investigated the efficacy and kinetics of response to each drug and safety. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed MM who were less than 66 years old were treated with bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 (cycles 1, 3, and 5) and dexamethasone 40 mg orally on days 1 through 4, 9 to 12, and 17 to 20 (cycles 2, 4, and 6), followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT). Responses were evaluated by modified European Bone Marrow Transplantation criteria. Random effects models were used to analyze the tumor response kinetics. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. Partial response (PR) or greater was 65% (12.5% complete response [CR], 10% very good PR [VGPR], and 42.5% PR) plus 17.5% minor response. Time to response was rapid, with 82% serum M-protein reduction achieved within the first two cycles. The M-protein decrease was similar with dexamethasone and with bortezomib (P = .48). Chromosome 13 deletion, t(4;14), and t(14;16) did not have a negative impact on response. Toxicity was low, with no grade 3 to 4 peripheral neuropathy and no grade 2 to 4 thrombocytopenia. The response rate after ASCT was 88%, with 33% CR (negative immunofixation) plus 22% VGPR. CONCLUSION: Bortezomib alternating with dexamethasone is a highly effective induction regimen with low toxicity. The kinetic study has shown a high degree of heterogeneity in response and rapid effect from both agents, supporting the use of a short induction regimen before ASCT in MM.