Myeloma Unit, Division of Hematology, University of Torino, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Department of Cellular Biotechnologies and Hematology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Dec;16(16):1617-29. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00389-7. Epub 2015 Nov 17.
BACKGROUND: High-dose melphalan plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard approach in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Our aims were to compare consolidation with high-dose melphalan plus ASCT versus chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone) plus lenalidomide, and maintenance with lenalidomide plus prednisone versus lenalidomide alone. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised, multicentre, phase 3 study at 59 centres in Australia, Czech Republic, and Italy. We enrolled transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed myeloma aged 65 years or younger. Patients received a common induction with four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg, days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22) and subsequent chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (3 g/m(2)) followed by granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for stem-cell mobilisation and collection. Using a 2 × 2 partial factorial design, we randomised patients to consolidation with either chemotherapy plus lenalidomide (six cycles of cyclophosphamide [300 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, and 15], dexamethasone [40 mg, days 1, 8, 15, and 22], and lenalidomide [25 mg, days 1-21]) or two courses of high-dose melphalan (200 mg/m(2)) and ASCT. We also randomised patients to maintenance with lenalidomide (10 mg, days 1-21) plus prednisone (50 mg, every other day) or lenalidomide alone. A simple randomisation sequence was used to assign patients at enrolment into one of the four groups (1:1:1:1 ratio), but the treatment allocation was disclosed only when the patient reached the end of the induction and confirmed their eligibility for consolidation. Both the patient and the treating clinician did not know the consolidation and maintenance arm until that time. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by intention-to-treat. The trial is ongoing and some patients are still receiving maintenance. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01091831. FINDINGS: 389 patients were enrolled between July 6, 2009, and May 6, 2011, with 256 eligible for consolidation (127 high-dose melphalan and ASCT and 129 chemotherapy plus lenalidomide) and 223 eligible for maintenance (117 lenalidomide plus prednisone and 106 lenalidomide alone). Median follow-up was 52·0 months (IQR 30·4-57·6). Progression-free survival during consolidation was significantly shorter with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide compared with high-dose melphalan and ASCT (median 28·6 months [95% CI 20·6-36·7] vs 43·3 months [33·2-52·2]; hazard ratio [HR] for the first 24 months 2·51, 95% CI 1·60-3·94; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival did not differ between maintenance treatments (median 37·5 months [95% CI 27·8-not evaluable] with lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 28·5 months [22·5-46·5] with lenalidomide alone; HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·59-1·20; p=0·34). Fewer grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide than with high-dose melphalan and ASCT; the most frequent were haematological (34 [26%] of 129 patients vs 107 [84%] of 127 patients), gastrointestinal (six [5%] vs 25 [20%]), and infection (seven [5%] vs 24 [19%]). Haematological serious adverse events were reported in two (2%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and no patients allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (10%) patients assigned chemotherapy plus lenalidomide and nine (7%) allocated high-dose melphalan and ASCT. During maintenance, adverse events did not differ between groups. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (nine [8%] of 117 patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone vs 14 [13%] of 106 allocated lenalidomide alone), infection (eight [8%] vs five [5%]), and systemic toxicities (seven [6%] vs two [2%]). Non-haematological serious adverse events were reported in 13 (11%) patients assigned lenalidomide plus prednisone versus ten (9%) allocated lenalidomide alone. Four patients died because of adverse events, three from infections (two during induction and one during consolidation) and one because of cardiac toxic effects. INTERPRETATION: Consolidation with high-dose melphalan and ASCT remains the preferred option in transplant-eligible patients with multiple myeloma, despite a better toxicity profile with chemotherapy plus lenalidomide. FUNDING: Celgene.
背景:大剂量马法兰联合自体干细胞移植(ASCT)是新诊断多发性骨髓瘤患者中符合移植条件的标准治疗方法。我们旨在比较巩固治疗时使用大剂量马法兰联合 ASCT 与化疗(环磷酰胺和地塞米松)联合来那度胺,以及维持治疗时使用来那度胺联合泼尼松与来那度胺单药的疗效。
方法:我们在澳大利亚、捷克共和国和意大利的 59 个中心开展了这项开放标签、随机、多中心、3 期研究。我们纳入了年龄在 65 岁及以下的新诊断多发性骨髓瘤且符合移植条件的患者。患者接受 4 个 28 天周期的来那度胺(25 mg,第 1-21 天)和地塞米松(40 mg,第 1、8、15 和 22 天)的联合诱导治疗,随后接受环磷酰胺(3 g/m2)化疗,继之以粒细胞集落刺激因子进行干细胞动员和采集。采用 2×2 部分析因设计,我们将患者随机分组至巩固治疗时接受化疗联合来那度胺(6 个周期的环磷酰胺[300 mg/m2,第 1、8 和 15 天]、地塞米松[40 mg,第 1、8、15 和 22 天]和来那度胺[25 mg,第 1-21 天])或两疗程大剂量马法兰(200 mg/m2)和 ASCT。我们还将患者随机分组至维持治疗时接受来那度胺(10 mg,第 1-21 天)联合泼尼松(50 mg,隔日 1 次)或来那度胺单药。患者在入组时按照 1:1:1:1 的比例被随机分配到这 4 组中的一组,但直到患者完成诱导治疗并确认有资格接受巩固治疗时才会披露治疗分配。直到那时,患者和治疗医生都不知道巩固和维持治疗的分组。主要终点是无进展生存期,采用意向治疗进行评估。试验正在进行中,部分患者仍在接受维持治疗。这项研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,编号为 NCT01091831。
发现:2009 年 7 月 6 日至 2011 年 5 月 6 日期间共纳入 389 例患者,其中 256 例符合巩固治疗条件(127 例接受大剂量马法兰和 ASCT,129 例接受化疗联合来那度胺),223 例符合维持治疗条件(117 例接受来那度胺联合泼尼松,106 例接受来那度胺单药)。中位随访时间为 52.0 个月(IQR 30.4-57.6)。与大剂量马法兰和 ASCT 相比,化疗联合来那度胺的巩固治疗期间无进展生存期明显更短(中位 28.6 个月[95%CI 20.6-36.7] vs 43.3 个月[33.2-52.2];前 24 个月的风险比[HR]为 2.51,95%CI 1.60-3.94;p<0.0001)。维持治疗的无进展生存期无差异(中位 37.5 个月[95%CI 27.8-无评估]接受来那度胺联合泼尼松与中位 28.5 个月[22.5-46.5]接受来那度胺单药;HR 0.84,95%CI 0.59-1.20;p=0.34)。与大剂量马法兰和 ASCT 相比,化疗联合来那度胺的 3 级或 4 级不良事件发生率更低,最常见的是血液学不良事件(34 例[26%]的 129 例患者 vs 107 例[84%]的 127 例患者)、胃肠道不良事件(6 例[5%] vs 25 例[20%])和感染(7 例[5%] vs 24 例[19%])。接受化疗联合来那度胺的 2 例(2%)患者发生了 2 级血液学严重不良事件,而接受大剂量马法兰和 ASCT 的患者无 3 级或 4 级血液学严重不良事件发生。接受化疗联合来那度胺的 13 例(10%)患者和接受大剂量马法兰和 ASCT 的 9 例(7%)患者发生了非血液学严重不良事件。在维持治疗期间,各组之间的不良事件无差异。最常见的 3 级或 4 级不良事件是中性粒细胞减少症(9 例[8%]的 117 例接受来那度胺联合泼尼松与 14 例[13%]的 106 例接受来那度胺单药)、感染(8 例[8%] vs 5 例[5%])和全身性毒性(7 例[6%] vs 2 例[2%])。接受来那度胺联合泼尼松的 13 例(11%)患者和接受来那度胺单药的 10 例(9%)患者发生了非血液学严重不良事件。4 例患者因不良事件死亡,其中 3 例死于感染(2 例在诱导期,1 例在巩固期),1 例死于心脏毒性。
解释:尽管化疗联合来那度胺具有更好的毒性特征,但对于符合移植条件的多发性骨髓瘤患者,大剂量马法兰联合 ASCT 仍然是首选治疗方法。
资金来源:Celgene。
N Engl J Med. 2014-9-4
J Immunother Cancer. 2025-3-28
Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2025-3
Curr Oncol Rep. 2025-3
Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2024-12-6
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2024-4