ABSTRACT
The combination of lenalidomide (Revlimid® , R) and dexamethasone (d) is a standard regimen for patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (rrMM). With this regimen, only a small fraction of patients will achieve high quality responses [≥ very good partial response (VGPR)]. The combination of bendamustine (B), lenalidomide and dexamethasone (BRd) has shown high efficacy in patients with advanced rrMM. However, dose-limiting haematotoxicity restricted its use in extensively pre-treated patient populations. This prospective, multicentre Phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of BRd in rrMM patients with one prior line of therapy. Fifty patients were enrolled (median age 68·5 years [range 46-83]) and were treated with B 75 mg/m2 days 1, 2; R 25 mg days 1-21 and d (40/20 mg) days 1, 8, 15 and 22, for 6 28-day induction cycles, followed by 12 cycles with Rd alone. Pegfilgrastim was administered according to protocol-defined criteria. The study aimed to demonstrate a complete response (CR)/VGPR rate of >40% after induction therapy. Of 45 evaluable patients, 23 (51%) achieved a CR/VGPR. Grade 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia occurred in 17 (34%) and 8 (16%) of patients, respectively. BRd is a safe and efficacious regimen as a second line treatment for rrMM, leading to high quality responses in a considerable proportion of patients.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Multiple Myeloma/drug therapy , Salvage Therapy/methods , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Bendamustine Hydrochloride/adverse effects , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Humans , Lenalidomide , Middle Aged , Multiple Myeloma/complications , Neutropenia/chemically induced , Remission Induction/methods , Thalidomide/administration & dosage , Thalidomide/analogs & derivatives , Thrombocytopenia/chemically induced , Thrombocytopenia/complications , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The objective of this randomized trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of rituximab as in vivo purging before transplantation and as maintenance treatment immediately after high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation (HDC-ASCT) in patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with relapsed FL who achieved either complete or very good partial remission with salvage chemotherapy were randomly assigned using a factorial design to rituximab purging (P+; 375 mg/m(2) once per week for 4 weeks) or observation (NP) before HDC-ASCT and to maintenance rituximab (M+; 375 mg/m(2) once every 2 months for four infusions) or observation (NM). RESULTS: From October 1999 to April 2006, 280 patients were enrolled. The median age was 51 years (range, 26 to 70 years), and baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. On average, patients were 44 months (range, 3 to 464 months) from diagnosis, with 79% having received two lines and 15% three lines of prior therapy. Median follow-up was 8.3 years. In contrast to purging, 10-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 48% for P+ and 42% for NP groups (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.11; P = .18); maintenance had a significant effect on PFS (10-year PFS, 54% for M+ and 37% for NM; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.91; P = .012). Overall survival (OS) was not improved by either rituximab purging or maintenance. CONCLUSION: Rituximab maintenance after HDC-ASCT is safe and significantly prolongs PFS but not OS in patients undergoing transplantation for relapsed FL. Pretransplantation rituximab in vivo purging, even in rituximab-naive patients, failed to improve PFS or OS.
