Wang Yucai, Yang Fang, Shen Yan, Zhang Wenwen, Wang Jacqueline, Chang Victor T, Andersson Borje S, Qazilbash Muzaffar H, Champlin Richard E, Berenson James R, Guan Xiaoxiang, Wang Michael L
Department of Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ (YW, VTC); Department of Medical Oncology, Jinling Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, China (FY, YS, WZ, XG); Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL (JW); Section of Hematology/Oncology, VA New Jersey Health Care System, East Orange, NJ (VTC); Department of Stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (BSA, MHQ, REC) and Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma (MLW), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Institute for Myeloma & Bone Cancer Research, West Hollywood, CA (JRB).
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Nov 18;108(3). doi: 10.1093/jnci/djv342. Print 2016 Mar.
Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors have dramatically changed management of multiple myeloma (MM). While MM remains incurable, consolidation and maintenance therapy aimed at improving duration of response can potentially improve survival outcomes. A majority of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated benefit of IMiD-based maintenance therapy in delaying disease progression; however, whether this therapy can lead to improved survival remains controversial.
PubMed and abstract databases of major hematology and/or oncology meetings were searched for RCTs that studied maintenance therapy with IMiDs in MM. A meta-analysis was conducted to systematically evaluate the impact of IMiD-based maintenance therapy on survival outcomes and serious adverse events associated with the therapy. All statistical tests were two-sided.
Eighteen phase 3 RCTs enrolling 7730 patients were included. IMiD-based maintenance therapy statistically significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.57 to 0.67, P < .001) but failed to improve overall survival (OS; HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.01, P = .082). Stratified analyses demonstrated that both thalidomide and lenalidomide provided PFS but not OS benefit in transplantation as well as nontransplantation settings. IMiD-based maintenance therapy in MM led to a higher risk of grade 3-4 thromboembolism (risk ratio = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.41 to 4.52, P = .002). Thalidomide maintenance therapy increased the risk of peripheral neuropathy; lenalidomide maintenance therapy increased the risks of myelosuppression and second primary hematological malignancies.
Thalidomide- or lenalidomide-based maintenance therapy improves PFS but not OS in MM and increases risks of grade 3-4 adverse events, including thromboembolism, peripheral neuropathy, neutropenia, and infection.
免疫调节药物(IMiDs)和蛋白酶体抑制剂极大地改变了多发性骨髓瘤(MM)的治疗方式。虽然MM仍无法治愈,但旨在延长缓解期的巩固和维持治疗可能会改善生存结果。大多数随机对照试验(RCT)已证明基于IMiD的维持治疗在延缓疾病进展方面的益处;然而,这种治疗是否能提高生存率仍存在争议。
检索PubMed以及主要血液学和/或肿瘤学会议的摘要数据库,以查找研究MM中基于IMiD维持治疗的RCT。进行荟萃分析以系统评估基于IMiD的维持治疗对生存结果以及与该治疗相关的严重不良事件的影响。所有统计检验均为双侧检验。
纳入了18项三期RCT,共7730例患者。基于IMiD的维持治疗在统计学上显著延长了无进展生存期(PFS;风险比(HR)=0.62,95%置信区间(CI)=0.57至0.67,P<.001),但未能改善总生存期(OS;HR=0.93,95%CI=0.85至1.01,P=.082)。分层分析表明,沙利度胺和来那度胺在移植和非移植环境中均能提供PFS益处,但不能提供OS益处。MM中基于IMiD的维持治疗导致3-4级血栓栓塞风险更高(风险比=2.52,95%CI=1.41至4.52,P=.002)。沙利度胺维持治疗增加了周围神经病变的风险;来那度胺维持治疗增加了骨髓抑制和第二原发性血液系统恶性肿瘤的风险。
基于沙利度胺或来那度胺的维持治疗可改善MM的PFS,但不能改善OS,并增加3-4级不良事件的风险,包括血栓栓塞、周围神经病变、中性粒细胞减少和感染。