No abstract

Key Points MRD using NGS-identified patients with an excellent outcome in multiple myeloma. MRD should be assessed in every prospective trial, and is a candidate to become a primary end point.

This trial confirms the superiority of the combination melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide over melphalan and prednisone alone for prolonging survival in very elderly patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicity was acceptable.

The Intergroupe Francophone du My-é lome (IFM) initiated 2 trials in 1999 to study patients with high-risk (␤2-microglobulin level greater than 3 mg/L and chromosome 13 deletion at diagnosis) de novo multiple myeloma. In both protocols, the induction regimen consisted of vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone

The Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD) as induction before high-dose therapy (HDT) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) to a combination consisting of reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide plus dexamethasone (vtD) in patients with multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 199 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VD or vtD. After 4 cycles, the complete response (CR) rate was the same in both groups (13% in the vtD arm, 12% in the VD arm, P ‫؍‬ .74). However, the CR plus very good partial response (VGPR) rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (49% vs 36%, P ‫؍‬ .05). After ASCT, the CR plus VGPR rate was significantly higher in the vtD arm (74% vs 58%, P ‫؍‬ .02). The reduced doses of bortezomib and thalidomide translated into a reduced incidence of peripheral neu- Continuing Medical Education onlineThis activity has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education through the joint sponsorship of Medscape, LLC and the American Society of Hematology. Medscape, LLC is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians. Medscape, LLC designates this Journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. All other clinicians completing this activity will be issued a certificate of participation. To participate in this journal CME activity: (1) review the learning objectives and author disclosures; (2) study the education content; (3) take the post-test with a 70% minimum passing score and complete the evaluation at http://www.medscape.org/journal/blood; and (4) view/print certificate. For CME questions, see page 5982. Disclosures

Key Points• The overall response rate following 4 induction cycles of VTD prior to ASCT is higher than that of 4 cycles of VCD.The Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome conducted a randomized trial to compare bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) with bortezomib-cyclophosphamidedexamethasone (VCD) as induction before high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Overall, a total of 340 patients were centrally randomly assigned to receive VTD or VCD. After 4 cycles, on an intent-to-treat basis, 66.3% of the patients in the VTD arm achieved at least a very good partial response (primary end point) vs 56.2% in the VCD arm (P 5 .05). In addition, the overall response rate was significantly higher in the VTD arm (92.3% vs 83.4% in the VCD arm; P 5 .01). Hematologic toxicity was higher in the VCD arm, with significantly increased rates of grade 3 and 4 anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. On the other hand, the rate of peripheral neuropathy (PN) was significantly higher in the VTD arm. With the exception of hematologic adverse events and PN, other grade 3 or 4 toxicities were rare, with no significant differences between the VTD and VCD arms. Our data support the preferential use of VTD rather than VCD in preparation for ASCT.

VTD was more effective than TD in the treatment of patients with MM with progressive or relapsing disease post-ASCT but was associated with a higher incidence of grade 3 neurotoxicity.

PURPOSE The wide heterogeneity in multiple myeloma (MM) outcome is driven mainly by cytogenetic abnormalities. The current definition of high-risk profile is restrictive and oversimplified. To adapt MM treatment to risk, we need to better define a cytogenetic risk classification. To address this issue, we simultaneously examined the prognostic impact of del(17p); t(4;14); del(1p32); 1q21 gain; and trisomies 3, 5, and 21 in a cohort of newly diagnosed patients with MM. METHODS Data were obtained from 1,635 patients enrolled in four trials implemented by the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome. The oldest collection of data were used for model development and internal validation. For external validation, one of the two independent data sets was used to assess the performance of the model in patients treated with more current regimens. Six cytogenetic abnormalities were identified as clinically relevant, and a prognostic index (PI) that was based on the parameter estimates of the multivariable Cox model was computed for all patients. RESULTS In all data sets, a higher PI was consistently associated with a poor survival outcome. Dependent on the validation cohorts used, hazard ratios for patients in the high-risk category for death were between six and 15 times higher than those of patients in the low-risk category. Among patients with t(4;14) or del(17p), we observed a worse survival in those classified in the high-risk category than in those in the intermediate-risk category. The PI showed good performance for discriminating between patients who died and those who survived (Harrell’s concordance index greater than 70%). CONCLUSION The cytogenetic PI improves the classification of newly diagnosed patients with MM in the high-risk group compared with current classifications. These findings may facilitate the development of risk-adapted treatment strategies.