Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk ; 18(10): e401-e419, 2018 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30030033

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The present prospective, multinational, noninterventional study aimed to document and describe real-world treatment regimens and disease progression in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients initiating any new MM therapy from October 2010 to October 2012 were eligible. A multistage patient/site recruitment model was applied to minimize the selection bias; enrollment was stratified by country, region, and practice type. The patient medical and disease features, treatment history, and remission status were recorded at baseline, and prospective data on treatment, efficacy, and safety were collected electronically every 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 2358 patients were enrolled. Of these patients, 775 and 1583 did and did not undergo stem cell transplantation (SCT) at any time during treatment, respectively. Of the patients in the SCT and non-SCT groups, 49%, 21%, 14%, and 15% and 57%, 20%, 12% and 10% were enrolled at treatment line 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT groups, 45% and 54% of the patients had received bortezomib-based therapy without thalidomide/lenalidomide, 12% and 18% had received thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy without bortezomib, and 30% and 4% had received bortezomib plus thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy as frontline treatment, respectively. The corresponding proportions of SCT and non-SCT patients in lines 2, 3, and ≥ 4 were 45% and 37%, 30% and 37%, and 12% and 3%, 33% and 27%, 35% and 32%, and 8% and 2%, and 27% and 27%, 27% and 23%, and 6% and 4%, respectively. In the SCT and non-SCT patients, the overall response rate was 86% to 97% and 64% to 85% in line 1, 74% to 78% and 59% to 68% in line 2, 55% to 83% and 48% to 60% in line 3, and 49% to 65% and 36% and 45% in line 4, respectively, for regimens that included bortezomib and/or thalidomide/lenalidomide. CONCLUSION: The results of our prospective study have revealed great diversity in the treatment regimens used to manage MM in real-life practice. This diversity was linked to factors such as novel agent accessibility and evolving treatment recommendations. Our results provide insight into associated clinical benefits.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/tratamento farmacológico , Padrões de Prática Médica , Terapia de Salvação , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Ácidos Borônicos/administração & dosagem , Bortezomib/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Lenalidomida/administração & dosagem , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/patologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida , Talidomida/administração & dosagem , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Br J Haematol ; 178(1): 61-71, 2017 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28382618

RESUMO

This phase II study explored the effects of bortezomib consolidation versus observation on myeloma-related bone disease in patients who had a partial response or better after frontline high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation. Patients were randomized to receive four 35-day cycles of bortezomib 1·6 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, 15 and 22, or an equivalent observation period, and followed up for disease status/survival. The modified intent-to-treat population included 104 patients (51 bortezomib, 53 observation). There were no meaningful differences in the primary endpoint of change from baseline to end of treatment in bone mineral density (BMD). End-of-treatment rates (bortezomib versus observation) of complete response/stringent complete response were 22% vs. 11% (P = 0·19), very good partial response or better of 80% vs. 68% (P = 0·17), and progressive disease of 8% vs. 23% (P = 0·06); median progression-free survival was 44·9 months vs. 21·8 months (P = 0·22). Adverse events observed ≥15% more frequently with bortezomib versus observation were diarrhoea (37% vs. 0), peripheral sensory neuropathy (20% vs. 4%), nausea (18% vs. 0) and vomiting (16% vs. 0). Compared with observation, bortezomib appeared to have little impact on bone metabolism/health, but was associated with trends for improved myeloma response and survival.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Bortezomib/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia de Consolidação/métodos , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Osteólise/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Idoso , Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Biomarcadores/sangue , Bortezomib/administração & dosagem , Bortezomib/efeitos adversos , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/complicações , Mieloma Múltiplo/fisiopatologia , Osteólise/etiologia , Osteólise/fisiopatologia , Transplante de Células-Tronco , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...