| Literature DB >> 22107129 |
Meaghan L Khan1, Craig B Reeder, Shaji K Kumar, Marthy Q Lacy, Donna E Reece, Angela Dispenzieri, Morie A Gertz, Phillip Greipp, Suzanne Hayman, Steven Zeldenhurst, David Dingli, John Lust, Stephen Russell, Kristina M Laumann, Joseph R Mikhael, P Leif Bergsagel, Rafael Fonseca, S Vincent Rajkumar, A Keith Stewart.
Abstract
Novel agents are considered standard components of induction therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. We retrospectively compared the results of three consecutive phase 2 clinical trials; RD (lenalidomide/dexamethasone, n=34), CRD (cyclophosphamide/lenalidomide/dexamethasone, n=53) and CyBorD (cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone, n=63) (N=150). Response rates after four cycles of treatment were: ≥near complete response (nCR), 12% vs. 2% vs. 41%, P<0·0001 and very good partial response or better, 35% vs. 30% vs. 65%, P=0·0003, respectively. With all cycles of therapy considered, ≥nCR was 35%, 15% and 41%, P=0·006. However, there is no evidence that one regimen produced superior progression-free survival (PFS) (median: 3·2 vs. 2·3 vs. 2·7years, P=0·11) or overall survival (3-year: 88% vs. 79% vs. 88%, P=0·23). Transplantation did not impact PFS (median: 2·7 vs. 2·3 years, P=0·41) but was associated with improved OS (3-year: 93% vs. 75%, P≤0·001). High genetic risk patients (n=40) had earlier relapse despite lenalidomide or bortezomib (median: 2·1 vs. 2·7years, P=0·45). Grade 3/4 toxicities were least with CyBorD while CRD had most toxicity. In conclusion, CyBorD demonstrated superior responses and less frequent serious toxicity but more neuropathy when compared to RD and CRD. Importantly, 80% of patients treated with modern therapeutic approaches are alive at 4years.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22107129 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2011.08949.x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Haematol ISSN: 0007-1048 Impact factor: 6.998