The mm Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the mm Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The mm and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The Multiple Myeloma Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out moreCreate an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View mm content recommended for you
On Monday 11 December 2017, an oral abstract session was held entitled: Session: 653. Myeloma: Therapy, excluding Transplantation I. The talk was presented by Alessandra Larocca from the Myeloma Unit, Division of Hematology, University of Torino, Torino, Italy and entitled: Abstract 744: Impact of Bortezomib- or Lenalidomide-Based Induction Treatment on High Risk Cytogenetic Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Enrolled in the Gimema-MM-03-05 and EMN01 Trials. This study assessed the impact of cytogenetics on outcomes in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) treated with bortezomib-based induction (BORT) or lenalidomide-based (LEN) treatment.
In the GIMEMA-MM-03-05-trial, patients (pts) were randomized to bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide for 9 cycles followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide (VMPT-VT) and compared to bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) for 9 cycles, without maintenance. In the EMN01-trial, patients were randomized to melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide (CPR) or lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) for 9 cycles, followed by maintenance with either lenalidomide alone or lenalidomide plus prednisone continuously.
CPR, cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide; MPR, melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression free survival; Rd, lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone; VMPT, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide | ||
Treatments | Median PFS (months) | Median OS (months) |
---|---|---|
VMPT | 33.8 | NR |
VMP | 25.1 | 71 |
Rd | 18.6 | 62 |
CPR | 18.9 | 67.5 |
MPR | 22.2 | 66.2 |
Dr. Larocca concluded that BORT-based treatments (i.e VMP) displayed an advantage for high-risk NDMM patients that are ineligible for transplant. In standard-risk patients, the choice of treatment should be based upon comorbidities (such as renal impairment), fitness/age, compliance and patient preference. Additionally, the study detected a higher overall survival in patients over the age of 75 years of age, when administered LEN-based treatments. It was suggested that FISH analysis should be performed in all NDMM for risk stratification and that better treatment options and newer combinations in the high-risk subtype, as classified in this study, are needed.
References