Rajshekhar Chakraborty1, Irbaz Bin Riaz2, Saad Ullah Malik3, Naimisha Marneni1, Alex Mejia Garcia1, Faiz Anwer1, Alok A Khorana1, S Vincent Rajkumar4, Shaji Kumar4, M Hassan Murad5, Zhen Wang5, Safi U Khan6, Navneet S Majhail7. 1. Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 2. Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Department of Hematology and Oncology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. 4. Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 5. Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia. 7. Blood and Marrow Transplant Program, Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thromboprophylaxis is routinely used with lenalidomide-based regimens in multiple myeloma because of a substantial risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, little is known about the incidence of VTE with contemporary lenalidomide-based regimens. The objective of the current study was to estimate the incidence of VTE despite thromboprophylaxis with currently used lenalidomide-based regimens in patients with myeloma. METHODS: The Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were queried from study inception to January 2019 for keywords to cover the following concepts: "lenalidomide," "venous thromboembolism," and "multiple myeloma." Phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials evaluating lenalidomide-based regimens with thromboprophylaxis were included. The pooled incidence rate of VTE was estimated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: The search generated 1372 citations, with 51 clinical trials and 9069 patients included for analysis. The most common thromboprophylaxis agents were aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin, administered either per risk-stratification or at investigators' discretion. The pooled incidence of VTE in trials of patients who had newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory myeloma was 6.2% (95% CI, 5.4%-7.1%) over median treatment durations ranging from 2 to 34 cycles, which translated into 1.2 VTE events per 100 patient-cycles (95% CI, 0.9-1.7 VTE events per 100 patient-cycles). Among contemporary regimens, the risk of VTE was low with combined lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.6] events/100 patient-cycles) and lenalidomide maintenance (0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.7] events per 100 patient-cycles). VTE risk was higher with combined lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone plus proteasome inhibitors (1.3 [95% CI, 0.7-2.3] events per 100 patient-cycles). CONCLUSIONS: Despite adequate thromboprophylaxis, lenalidomide-based regimens have a substantial risk of VTE in controlled clinical trial settings. Further studies are needed on new thromboprophylaxis strategies with regimens that have a high VTE risk.
BACKGROUND: Thromboprophylaxis is routinely used with lenalidomide-based regimens in multiple myeloma because of a substantial risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, little is known about the incidence of VTE with contemporary lenalidomide-based regimens. The objective of the current study was to estimate the incidence of VTE despite thromboprophylaxis with currently used lenalidomide-based regimens in patients with myeloma. METHODS: The Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were queried from study inception to January 2019 for keywords to cover the following concepts: "lenalidomide," "venous thromboembolism," and "multiple myeloma." Phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials evaluating lenalidomide-based regimens with thromboprophylaxis were included. The pooled incidence rate of VTE was estimated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: The search generated 1372 citations, with 51 clinical trials and 9069 patients included for analysis. The most common thromboprophylaxis agents were aspirin, low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin, administered either per risk-stratification or at investigators' discretion. The pooled incidence of VTE in trials of patients who had newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory myeloma was 6.2% (95% CI, 5.4%-7.1%) over median treatment durations ranging from 2 to 34 cycles, which translated into 1.2 VTE events per 100 patient-cycles (95% CI, 0.9-1.7 VTE events per 100 patient-cycles). Among contemporary regimens, the risk of VTE was low with combined lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (0.2 [95% CI, 0.1-0.6] events/100 patient-cycles) and lenalidomide maintenance (0.0 [95% CI, 0.0-0.7] events per 100 patient-cycles). VTE risk was higher with combined lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone plus proteasome inhibitors (1.3 [95% CI, 0.7-2.3] events per 100 patient-cycles). CONCLUSIONS: Despite adequate thromboprophylaxis, lenalidomide-based regimens have a substantial risk of VTE in controlled clinical trial settings. Further studies are needed on new thromboprophylaxis strategies with regimens that have a high VTE risk.
Authors: S Knop; C Langer; M Engelhardt; L-O Mügge; A Reichle; W Rösler; F Bassermann; B Hertenstein; A Kunitz; C Röllig; H Ostermann; K Schäfer-Eckart; M Ringhoffer; A Günther; C Junghanss; H Biersack; M Schreder; A Liebert; S Held; H Einsele; R C Bargou Journal: Leukemia Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Paul G Richardson; Edie Weller; Sagar Lonial; Andrzej J Jakubowiak; Sundar Jagannath; Noopur S Raje; David E Avigan; Wanling Xie; Irene M Ghobrial; Robert L Schlossman; Amitabha Mazumder; Nikhil C Munshi; David H Vesole; Robin Joyce; Jonathan L Kaufman; Deborah Doss; Diane L Warren; Laura E Lunde; Sarah Kaster; Carol Delaney; Teru Hideshima; Constantine S Mitsiades; Robert Knight; Dixie-Lee Esseltine; Kenneth C Anderson Journal: Blood Date: 2010-04-12 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Stefan Knop; Christian Gerecke; Peter Liebisch; Max S Topp; Uwe Platzbecker; Orhan Sezer; Christina Vollmuth; Karina Falk; Axel Glasmacher; Uwe Maeder; Hermann Einsele; Ralf C Bargou Journal: Blood Date: 2009-01-30 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Sonja Zweegman; Bronno van der Holt; Ulf-Henrik Mellqvist; Morten Salomo; Gerard M J Bos; Mark-David Levin; Heleen Visser-Wisselaar; Markus Hansson; Annette W G van der Velden; Wendy Deenik; Astrid Gruber; Juleon L L M Coenen; Torben Plesner; Saskia K Klein; Bea C Tanis; Damian L Szatkowski; Rolf E Brouwer; Matthijs Westerman; M Rineke B L Leys; Harm A M Sinnige; Einar Haukås; Klaas G van der Hem; Marc F Durian; E Vera J M Mattijssen; Niels W C J van de Donk; Marian J P L Stevens-Kroef; Pieter Sonneveld; Anders Waage Journal: Blood Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Wolfram Pönisch; Simone Heyn; Juliane Beck; Ina Wagner; Martin Mohren; Franz A Hoffmann; Thoralf Lange; Marion Schmalfeld; Thomas Zehrfeld; Andreas Schwarzer; Cornelia Winkelmann; Thomas Edelmann; Ramona Röhrborn; Karin Hebenstreit; Haifa K Al-Ali; Nadja Jäkel; Dietger Niederwieser Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Sagar Lonial; Paul G Richardson; Jesús San Miguel; Pieter Sonneveld; Michael W Schuster; Joan Bladé; Jamie Cavenagh; S Vincent Rajkumar; Andrzej J Jakubowiak; Dixie-Lee Esseltine; Kenneth C Anderson; Jean-Luc Harousseau Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2008-08-18 Impact factor: 6.998