All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the International Myeloma Foundation or Myeloma crowd.

The Multiple Myeloma Hub uses cookies on this website. They help us give you the best online experience. By continuing to use our website without changing your cookie settings, you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our updated Cookie Policy
  TRANSLATE

The Multiple Myeloma 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 Multiple Myeloma Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Multiple Myeloma Hub 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.

Steering CommitteeAbout UsNewsletterContact

PANORAMA-3: Panobinostat can be safely combined with subcutaneous bortezomib

Feb 4, 2021
Share:

While significant progress has been made in the long-term management of multiple myeloma, novel treatment options are needed to improve the duration of response (DoR) in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).1

Histone deacetylation (HDAC) is part of myeloma cell cycle progression and DNA repair. Inhibitors of HDAC have been studied in combination with other established and novel treatments. Panobinostat is an orally available pan-deacetylase inhibitor, approved for RRMM in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd) in 2015 in both the U.S. and the EU, based on the results of the phase III PANORAMA-1 study (NCT01023308).2 However, it was approved with a warning for severe diarrhea and cardiac events.3

A real-world study recently analyzed the adverse drug reactions reported with panobinostat during the 2 years following its approval. They found that gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) were the most frequently reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System and that there was a statistically significant increase in the risk of experiencing an adverse drug reaction with panobinostat than what was initially reported in the clinical trials.4

Panobinostat was approved only in combination with intravenous bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, which has been associated with AEs that include peripheral neuropathy, gastrointestinal symptoms, and transient thrombocytopenia.1,2

Overall, there were two non-exclusive potential approaches to improve the safety profile of PVd combination without risking its efficacy in RRMM: to test alternative dosing schedules of panobinostat, and to administer bortezomib subcutaneously, which exhibits a more favorable toxicity profile with similar efficacy.2

In January 2021, Jacob Laubach et al. published in Lancet Oncology the efficacy and safety preliminary results of three different dosing regimens of oral panobinostat combined with subcutaneous bortezomib and oral dexamethasone in an open-label, randomized, multi-center phase II study in patients with RRMM (PANORAMA-3, NCT02654990).1 

Study design1

In PANORAMA-3, patients (N=248) aged 18 years or older have been recruited from 71 hospitals and medical centers in 21 countries.1 Eligible patients had received 1–4 prior lines of therapy. Patients were ineligible if they had previously received antimyeloma chemotherapy or medication up to 2 weeks before the study began or if they were refractory to bortezomib.

The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) after all patients had completed up to eight treatment cycles.

Secondary efficacy endpoints included:

  • ORR throughout the study
  • DoR
  • Progression-free survival (PFS)

Patients (N=248) were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive one of three treatment regimens in 21-day cycles (14 days on, 7 days off) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity:

  • Panobinostat 20 mg three times weekly (n=82), the approved dosing schedule
  • Panobinostat 20 mg twice weekly (n=83)
  • Panobinostat 10 mg three times weekly (n=83)

Dosing and scheduling for subcutaneous bortezomib and oral dexamethasone were based on patient age and were the same in each panobinostat arm:

  • Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 subcutaneous administration twice weekly or weekly, depending on patients’ age
  • Dexamethasone 20mg pre- and 24 hours after bortezomib; 10mg for patients > 75 years

Statistical analyses

Primary analysis occurred when all patients had completed up to eight cycles of treatment. Interim analyses were performed when approximately 120 patients (40 per group) had been treated for up to eight cycles. Final analyses will be carried out when all patients have1:

  • Completed a 3-year survival follow-up, and/or
  • Discontinued from the study

Results1

Characteristics of the patients enrolled include:

  • Median age (range): 66.5 (59.0–73.0)
  • Relapsed at baseline: 68%
  • Relapsed or relapsed and refractory at baseline: 32%
  • Prior stem cell transplantation: 36%
  • A median of two prior lines of treatment (interquartile range, 1.0–2.0) that mainly consisted of immunomodulatory drugs (>99%), steroids (97%), and proteasome inhibitors (74%)

After a median follow-up of 14.7 months, the investigators reported lower response rates and shorter remission with panobinostat at 10mg. When comparing the two treatment arms that used 20mg panobinositat, both seemed to achieve similar response rates, although the three times weekly group achieved longer remissions, which could translate into higher survival outcomes with longer follow-up. However, this study was not designed for statistical comparisons between arms.

Please see Table 1 for results by selected primary and secondary endpoints.

Table 1. Primary and secondary endpoint results by treatment arm1

Response criteria

Panobinostat 20 mg three times weekly (n=82)

Panobinostat 20 mg twice weekly

(n=83)

Panobinostat 10 mg three times weekly (n=83)

CI, confidence interval; DoR, duration of response; ORR, overall response rate; PFS, progression-free survival.

ORR after up to 8 cycles, %
[95% CI]
number of patients

62.2%
[50.8–72.7]
51

65.1%
[53. 8–75.2]
54

50.6%
[39.4–61.8]
42

ORR after all cycles, %
[95% CI]
number of patients

62.2%
[50.8–72.7]
51

67.5%
[56.3–77.4]
56

53.0%
[41.7–64.1]
44

Median DoR, months
[95% CI]
number of events

22
[13.9–NE]
19

12
[8.8–21.3]
26

11
[6.2–14.5]
22

PFS probability at 12 months
[95% CI]
number of events

53%
[39–64]
29

51%
[38–63]
31

33%
[20–45]
40

Adverse Events

More than 75% of patients experienced a Grade ≥3 AE, irrespective of the dose of panobinostat. The majority were considered treatment-related, and in 21.8% and 24.1% of patients, these led to treatment discontinuation in the arms with higher doses of panobinostat (three times weekly and twice weekly, respectively). Cases of treatment discontinuation due to AEs decreased to 11.3% with panobinostat at the 10 mg dose.

Diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and anemia were some of the most frequently reported AEs across arms. Please see Table 2 for a summary of AEs grouped by primary system organ class.

Table 2. Summary of adverse events by treatment arm1

 

Panobinostat 20 mg three times weekly (n=78)

Panobinostat 20 mg twice weekly (n=83)

Panobinostat 10 mg three times weekly (n=80)

Data are n (%) where n refers to the number of patients. The table shows grade 1-2 events occurring in ≥ 10% of patients in any group, and grade 3-4 events occurring ≥ 2% patients in any group. Patients with multiple severity grades for an AE are only counted under the most severe grade. Events include both treatment-related and non-treatment-related adverse events.

Event

Grade 1–2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 1–2

Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 1–2

Grade 3

Grade 4

1 event, n (%)

7 (9)

37 (47)

34 (44)

14 (17)

46 (55)

23 (28)

19 (24)

41 (51)

19 (24)

Blood and lymphatic system, n (%)

14 (18)

19 (24)

26 (33)

16 (19)

22 (27)

12 (14)

10 (13)

21 (26)

9 (11)

Cardiac disorders, n (%)

9 (12)

2 (3)

1 (1)

5 (6)

2 (2)

0

12 (15)

3 (4)

2 (3)

Ear and labyrinth disorders, n (%)

8 (10)

1 (1)

0

4 (5)

0

0

4 (5)

0

0

Eye disorders, n (%)

12 (15)

1 (1)

0

12 (14)

1 (1)

0

13 (16)

0

0

Gastrointestinal disorders, n (%)

48 (62)

17 (22)

0

49 (59)

16 (19)

0

54 (68)

8 (10)

0

General disorders, administration site conditions, n (%)

31 (40)

25 (32)

0

36 (43)

19 (23)

3 (4)

32 (40)

16 (20)

0

Infections and infestations, n (%)

35 (45)

17 (22)

1 (1)

40 (48)

12 (14)

5 (6)

34 (43)

15 (19)

4 (5)

Investigations, n (%)

19 (24)

9 (12)

6 (8)

26 (31)

9 (11)

3 (4)

15 (19)

5 (6)

3 (4)

Metabolism and nutrition disorders, n (%)

15 (19)

14 (18)

2 (3)

26 (31)

12 (14)

2 (2)

23 (29)

5 (6)

2 (3)

Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified, (including cysts and polyps) , n (%)

2 (3)

0

0

1 (1)

0

0

1 (1)

2 (3)

0

Nervous system disorders, n (%)

43 (55)

8 (10)

1 (1)

38 (46)

11 (13)

0

31 (39)

4 (5)

0

Psychiatric disorders (inc. insomnia), n (%)

13 (17)

4 (5)

0

18 (22)

7 (8)

0

14 (18)

4 (5)

0

Renal and urinary disorders, n (%)

12 (15)

3 (4)

0

8 (10)

2 (2)

1 (1)

6 (8)

5 (6)

0

Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders, n (%)

22 (28)

7 (9)

1 (1)

24 (29)

4 (5)

0

19 (24)

4 (5)

1 (1)

Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders, n (%)

15 (19)

2 (3)

0

12 (14)

0

0

12 (15)

0

0

Vascular disorders, n (%)

11 (14)

5 (6)

0

13 (16)

1 (1)

1 (1)

11 (14)

4 (5)

0

Conclusion

In the RRMM setting, there is an urgent need for drugs that can overcome resistance to previous therapies and produce clinically meaningful responses in patients who progress after multiple lines of therapy.

In PANORAMA-3, patients treated with panobinostat plus bortezomib plus dexamethasone experienced ORRs from 50.6% to 65.1%, despite having received a median of two previous lines of therapy and 68% of all patients having previous bortezomib exposure.

Although there was greater toxicity associated with the 20 mg doses of panobinostat than the 10 mg dose, the safety profile was favorable compared with the PANORAMA-1 trial, and the antitumor activity was preserved. This finding suggests that the use of subcutaneous bortezomib meaningfully improves tolerability and patient outcomes with the triplet PVd. Previous trials of panobinostat plus bortezomib plus dexamethasone in patients with RRMM have demonstrated similar results, lending support to the consistency and reproducibility of these findings.

  1. Laubach JP, Schjesvold F, Mariz M, et al. Efficacy and safety of oral panobinostat plus subcutaneous bortezomib and oral dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (PANORAMA 3): an open-label, randomized, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2021;22:142-154. DOI: 10.1016/ S1470-2045(20)30680-X
  2. Bailey H, Stenehjem DD, Sharma S. Panobinostat for the treatment of multiple myeloma: the evidence to date. J Blood Med. 2015;6:269-276. DOI: 10.2147/JBM.S69140
  3. National Cancer Institute. FDA approves panobinostat for some patients with multiple myeloma - National Cancer Institute. https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2015/fda-approves-panobinostat. Published Mar 19, 2015. Accessed Jan 28, 2021.
  4. Borrelli EP, McGladrigan CG. Differences in safety profiles of newly approved medications for multiple myeloma in real-world settings versus randomized controlled trials. J Oncol Pharm. 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1078155220941937

Share: