The role of novel agents on the reversibility of renal impairment in newly diagnosed symptomatic patients with multiple myeloma.

The role of thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide in multiple myeloma patients presenting with renal impairment was evaluated in 133 consecutive newly diagnosed patients who were treated with a novel agent-based regimen. A significant improvement of renal function (renalPR (renal partial response)) was observed in 77% of patients treated with bortezomib, in 55% with thalidomide and in 43% with lenalidomide (P=0.011). In multivariate analysis, bortezomib-based therapy was independently associated with a higher probability of renal response compared with thalidomide- or lenalidomide-based therapy. Other important variables included eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate) ≥30 ml/min, age ≤65 years and myeloma response. Patients treated with bortezomib achieved at least renalPR in a median of 1.34 months vs 2.7 months for thalidomide and >6 months for lenalidomide-treated patients (P=0.028). In multivariate analysis bortezomib-based therapy, higher doses of dexamethasone (≥160 mg during the first month of treatment), an eGFR ≥30 ml/min and age ≤65 years were independently associated with shorter time to renal response. In conclusion, bortezomib-based therapies may be more appropriate for the initial management of patients with myeloma-related renal failure; however, thalidomide and lenalidomide are also associated with significant probability of improvement of their renal function.

Treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma with lenalidomide and dexamethasone with or without bortezomib: prospective evaluation of the impact of cytogenetic abnormalities and of previous therapies.

We prospectively studied the impact of several cytogenetic abnormalities (CAs) in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma who received lenalidomide and dexamethasone (RD) with or without the addition of bortezomib (V). On the basis of the presence of previous neuropathy, 50 patients were treated with RD and 49, without preexisting neuropathy, with VRD. The overall response rate was 63%, similar for RD and VRD. Poor risk cytogenetics were associated with lower response rates in RD (P=0.01), but not in VRD (P=0.219). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was similar for RD (9 months) and VRD (7 months). The median overall survival (OS) for all patients was 16 months, with no differences between RD or VRD regimens. Poor risk cytogenetics, especially del17p, resistance to previous thalidomide, elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and presence of extramedullary disease were associated with inferior response to therapy and shorter PFS and OS. The impact of other CAs on OS was more pronounced in RD. In conclusion, the presence of CAs is an important adverse prognostic factor for patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma, but resistance to previous thalidomide, elevated LDH and presence of extramedullary disease remain of major prognostic importance. The outcome of patients with del17p remains extremely poor even with VRD combination.