Purpose In patients with myeloma, thalidomide significantly improves outcomes but increases the risk of thromboembolic events. In this randomized, open-label, multicenter trial, we compared aspirin (ASA) or fixed low-dose warfarin (WAR) versus low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) for preventing thromboembolism in patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens. Patients and Methods A total of 667 patients with previously untreated myeloma who received thalidomide-containing regimens and had no clinical indication or contraindication for a specific antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy were randomly assigned to receive ASA (100 mg/d), WAR (1.25 mg/d), or LMWH (enoxaparin 40 mg/d). A composite primary end point included serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden deaths during the first 6 months of treatment. Results Of 659 analyzed patients, 43 (6.5%) had serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, or sudden death during the first 6 months (6.4% in the ASA group, 8.2% in the WAR group, and 5.0% in the LMWH group). Compared with LMWH, the absolute differences were +1.3% (95% CI, −3.0% to 5.7%; P = .544) in the ASA group and +3.2% (95% CI, −1.5% to 7.8%; P = .183) in the WAR group. The risk of thromboembolism was 1.38 times higher in patients treated with thalidomide without bortezomib. Three major (0.5%) and 10 minor (1.5%) bleeding episodes were recorded. Conclusion In patients with myeloma treated with thalidomide-based regimens, ASA and WAR showed similar efficacy in reducing serious thromboembolic events, acute cardiovascular events, and sudden deaths compared with LMWH, except in elderly patients where WAR showed less efficacy than LMWH.

We present the results of a phase 2 study using thalidomide, dexamethasone, and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (ThaDD) in the treatment of 50 patients older than 65 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Thalidomide 100 mg was administered orally at bedtime continuously, dexamethasone 40 mg was administered orally on days 1 to 4 and 9 to 12, and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 40 mg/m 2 was administered intravenously on day 1 over the 28-day cycle. Response was assessed according to the EBMT criteria. Seventeen (34%) patients achieved CR, 7 (14%) nCR, 5 (10%) VGPR, 15 (30%) PR, and 5 (10%) MR, resulting in an ORR of 98%. Only 1 patient (2%) presented progressive disease. Time to progression (TTP), event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) projected at 3 years were 60%, 57%, and 74%, respectively, and these parameters were significantly higher in those patients achieving a response of at least VGPR versus those who did not. Grade 3 and 4 nonhematologic adverse events were constipation (10%), fatigue (6%), tremors (4%), mucositis (4%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (2%). Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia occurred in 12% of patients. Grade 3 and 4 infections and thromboembolic accidents were observed in 22% and 14% of patients, respectively. In the treatment of elderly patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, ThaDD is a very effective regimen with manageable toxicity.

The combination of melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (MPT) has demonstrated efficacy and acceptable toxicity in newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Panobinostat is a potent oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi). In preclinical and clinical studies, panobinostat showed good anti-myeloma activity in combination with several agents. This phase II study evaluated the combination of a fixed dose of MPT with escalating doses of panobinostat (three times weekly for 3 weeks, followed by a 9-day rest period) in relapsed/refractory MM. We used a two-stage design to determine whether the combination was safe and effective. At least a partial response was observed in 38.5% of patients. The maximum tolerated dose of panobinostat in combination with MPT could not be determined due to the high rate of dose-limiting toxicities experienced with panobinostat at doses of 10 and 15 mg. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (71%) and thrombocytopenia (35.5%). In conclusion, MPT in combination with panobinostat three times weekly for 3 weeks followed by a 9-day rest period is not well tolerated in patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Future studies should evaluate alternative dose schedules of panobinostat.

No abstract

SummaryMaintenance therapy was explored in multiple myeloma (MM) patients after conventional thalidomide, dexamethasone and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (ThaDD). Patients with newly or relapsed MM obtaining at least minor response after 6 ThaDD courses, were randomised to receive a-interferon (IFN) 3 MU 3 times a week or thalidomide 100 mg daily until relapse. Both groups also received pulsed dexamethasone 20 mg 4 d a month. Fifty-one patients were randomized in the IFN-dexamethasone (ID) arm and 52 in the thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) arm. The characteristics of two groups were similar. A significantly better 2-years progression-free survival (PFS; 63% vs. 32%; P = 0AE024) and overall survival (84% vs. 68%; P = 0AE030) was observed in the thalidomide arm. In high-risk patients and in those achieving less than very good partial response after induction, TD fared better in term of PFS. Main side effects were peripheral neuropathy and constipation in TD group, fatigue, anorexia and haematological toxicity in ID arm. There was a 21% probability of discontinuation at 3 years in the thalidomide arm and 44% in the IFN arm (P = 0AE014). Low-dose thalidomide plus pulsed low-dose dexamethasone after conventional thalidomide combination-based therapy was also feasible in the long term, enabling significantly better residual disease control if compared with a standard maintenance therapy.

The literature provides scant data concerning infectious complications and their effect on the outcome of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) treated with new drug combinations. Despite no substantial myelotoxic effect, thalidomide increases the risk of severe infections in patients with MM. We studied 202 patients who received regimens containing thalidomide in order to assess the time, type, outcome, and factors affecting development of severe infections, role of antibiotic prophylaxis, and effect of severe infections on final outcome. Thirty-eight patients (19%) developed a severe infection early during induction therapy and most infections were pneumonia. Only one patient died due to septic shock during neutropenia. No significant differences were reported in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between patients developing a severe infection and those who did not. Multivariate analysis determined a monoclonal component >3 g/dL and platelets <130 ,000/μL as factors associated with increased risk of severe infection. Primary antibiotic prophylaxis significantly decreased the probability of severe infection only in patients having both the above risk factors. Patients with MM receiving thalidomide combinations with high tumor burden are at high risk of developing severe infections and require primary antibiotic prophylaxis, whereas in other patients it is questionable. However, patient final outcome was not affected by infection development.

Overall response rate was significantly higher in ThaDD group (92% vs. 63.5%; P < 0.0001) as partial response rate (> or =PR) (75.5% vs. 59.5%; P = 0.077), very good partial response rate (> or =VGPR) (36% vs. 15%; P = 0.018) and near complete remission rate (> or =nCR) (30% vs. 10.5%; P = 0.002). Non-hematologic toxicity was similar in the two groups of patients whereas hematologic toxicity and infections were significantly higher in ThaDD patients. Median progression-free survival, event-free survival, and overall survival were significantly longer in patients receiving ThaDD than in those treated with Thal-Dex. ThaDD regimen significantly improved response rate and overall survival in comparison with Thal-Dex. Although the frequency of hematologic toxicity and infections resulted higher in ThaDD group compared with control group, they were not particularly frequent after adequate prophylaxis was added and were easily managed when occurred.

Complete remission (CR) obtained with ThaDD plus maintenance was 24% whereas it was 57% after ThaDD plus HDT-ASCT (P = 0.0232). However, after a median follow-up of 36 months, median time to progression (TTP) and progression free survival (PFS) of the group of patients undergone HDT were not significantly different to those of patients receiving ThaDD plus maintenance (32 vs. 31 months: P = 0.962; 32 vs. 29 months: P = 0.726, respectively). Five-year overall survival (OS) was 49% in the first group and 46% in the latter one (P = 0.404). As expected, a significantly higher incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, infections, mucositis and alopecia were observed in the ThaDD plus HDT group. Our results suggest that in elderly MM patients ThaDD plus HDT, albeit significantly increases CR rate, seems to be equivalent to ThaDD plus maintenance in terms of TTP, PFS and OS. These results challenge the requirement for HDT consolidation in this subset of patients.