SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 47
Baixar para ler offline
Changing Landscape of
Treatment for Multiple Myeloma
Ravi Vij MD
Associate Professor
Section of BMT and Leukemia
Washington University School of Medicine,
Changing Landscape of Treatment for Multiple Myeloma
Trends in Overall Survival of MM
Overall survival 1971–2006
Diagnosis period Median OS
1996–2006 45 months
1971–1996 30 months
(P<0.001)
Kumar SK, et al. Blood. 2008;111:2516-2520.
Time from diagnosis (Months)
Survival
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
2001–2006
1995–2000
2001–2006
1989–1994
1983–1988
1977–1982
1971–1976
OS, overall survival.
3
M
Trends in 10-Year Relative Survival of MM
4
Period estimates of 10-year relative survival of patients with MM by major age groups
in defined calendar periods from 1984-1986 to 2002-2004
*Relative survival reflects survival of patients with cancer compared with survival of the general population.
Brenner H, et al. Blood. 2008;111:2521-2526.
Calendar period
1984-
1986
1987-
1989
1990-
1992
1993-
1995
1996-
1998
1999-
2001
2002-
2004
10-yearrelativesurvival(%)*
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
15-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
80+
Age range
Surviv al Outcom es from Tim e Zero
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0 12 24 36 48 60
Months from Time Zero
Ov erall Surv ival
Ev ent-Free Surv ival
Ev ents / N
173 / 291
222 / 291
M edian
in M onths
9 (7,11)
5 (4,6)
Kumar S. EHA 2010
Overall and Event-Free Survival in Patients Relapsing and Refractory
to Bortezomib and Thalidomide/Lenalidomide
Proteasome Inhibitors in MM
R/R: relapsed/refractoryNIH clinical trials. Available at: www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed February 2012.
Bortezomib
Carfilzomib
MLN9708 (oral)
CEP-18770
Marizomib
ONX 0912 (oral)
Phase I Phase II/IIb Phase Ib/II Ph III
Heme Malig. R/R R/Rw/ Rd Newly
Diagnosed
Phase I/II
Phase I/II
Phase I
Phase I/II
Accelerated FDA
approval R/R
Full FDA
approval
R/R
FDA approval
1st-line
Optimization in
combination with other
agents
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2012
Differentiation of Proteasome Inhibitors
Compound Phase Compound
Type
Main Enzymatic
Site Specificity
Dissociation
Kinetics
t ½ (min)
Route of
admin.
Bortezomib Approved Peptide
boronate
b5 110 IV
Carfilzomib III Peptide
epoxyketone
b5 Irreversible IV
CEP-18770 I Peptide
boronate
b5 Slowly reversible IV
MLN9708 I Peptide
boronate
b5 18 IV
Oral
ONX 0912 I Peptide
epoxyketone
b5 Irreversible Oral
NPI-0052 I b-lactone
inhibitor
b1, b2, b5 Irreversible IV
Dick LR and Fleming PE. Drug Discov Today. 2010;15(5/6):243-249. Demo SD, et al. Cancer Res. 2007;67:6383-6391. Parlati F, et
al. Blood. 2009;114(16):3439-3447. Miller CP, et al. Blood. 2007;110(1):267-277. Piva R, et al. Blood. 2008;111(5):2765-2775.
Kupperman E, et al. Cancer Res. 2010;70(5):1970-1980. Chauhan D, et al. Blood. 2010;116(23):4906-4915.
b1: Caspase-like site; b2: Trypsin-like site; b5: Chymotrypsin-like site. NR, not reported.
Carfilzomib Monotherapy in Heavily
Pre-Treated MM Patients, Phase IIb
Carfilzomib
20 mg/m2 days
1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 every 28
days
N = 46
MM: Progressive disease
> 2 prior therapy lines for relapsed
disease
including bortezomib, thalidomide
or lenalidomide, an alkylating
agent, or an anthracycline alone or
in combination
Carfilzomib
Dose escalation to 27 mg/m2
after cycle 1 up to 12 cycles
N = 266
003-A0
003-A1
Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012;120(14):2817-25
Primary Endpoints: overall response rate (ORR; ≥ partial response)
Secondary Endpoints: clinical benefit response rate (≥ minimal response), duration
of response (DOR), progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), and safety
Carfilzomib Monotherapy in Heavily
Pre-Treated MM Patients, Phase IIb
Patient Baseline Characteristics N = 266
Median age 63 years (range, 37-87)
Median time since diagnosis 5.4 years (range, 0.5-22.3)
ECOG < 1 87%
Baseline grade 1/2 neuropathy 77%
Unfavorable Cytogenetic/FISH Prognostic Markers 28%
Median prior lines of therapy
> 4 prior lines
Median # anti-MM agents
PD at study entry
Refractory to last therapy
Refractory or intolerant to bortezomib & lenalidomide
5 (range, 1-20)
82%
13 (range, 3-45)
100%
95%
80%
Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012;120(14):2817-25
*** 266 patients evaluable for safety & 257 evaluable for efficacy (9 patients excluded because of missing
baseline and/or post-baseline disease assessment)
Carfilzomib Monotherapy in Heavily
Pre-Treated MM, 003 Trial
N ORR % Median
DOR
(month)
Median
OS
(month)
Median
PFS
(month)
Response-Evaluable Patients 257 23.7% 7.8* 15.6 3.7
Bz + len-refractory 169 15.4% 7.8 11.9 NR
Bz + len refractory/intolerant 214 20.1 % 7.4 13.2 NR
ORR ≥ partial response
* Calculated from 61 patients with partial response or better
Bz, bortezomib; len, lenalidomide; imid, lenalidomide or thalidomide; mo, month; NR, not reported.
Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012 ;120(14):2817-25.
Unfavorable cytogenetics did not significantly impact response rates or DOR
Selected Adverse Events With Carfilzomib
in Heavily Pre-Treated MM Patients
Adverse Event > Grade 3
N = 266
Hematologic: Anemia
Thrombocytopenia
Lymphopenia
Neutropenia
24%
29%
20%
11%
Non-hematologic: Fatigue
Dyspnea
Upper respiratory tract infection
Headache
7.5%
3.4%
4.5%
1.9%
Other: Febrile neutropenia
Peripheral neuropathy*
0.8%
1.1%
Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012 ;120(14):2817-25.
* Grouped PN all events of neuropathy, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral sensory
neuropathy, & peripheral motor neuropathy
Carfilzomib in MM Patients Following
1-3 Prior Therapies
004, Phase II
1:1
Carfilzomib
Cohort 1
20 mg/m2
(all treatment cycles)
Relapsed / Refractory
Multiple Myeloma
1-3 Prior Therapies
N = 164 Carfilzomib
Cohort 2
20 mg/m2 (cycle 1)→27
mg/m2
Bortezomib-treated
(n=35)
Bortezomib-naïve
(n=59)
Bortezomib-naïve
(n=70)
Bortezomib-naïve Bortezomib-treated
N 129 35
Median age 65 years 63 years
Median # prior therapies 2 3
Carfilzomib: IV, days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 every 28 days for up to 12 cycles
Vij R, et al. Blood. 2012; 119(24):5661-70. Vij R, et al. Br J Haematol. 2012 Sep;158(6):739-48.
Carfilzomib Monotherapy
MM Patients With 1-3 Prior Therapies
Bortezomib-Treated Cohort 1 (20 mg/m2 Carfilzomib)
n = 35
ORR 17.1%
CBR (> MR) 31.4%
Median TTP 4.6 months
Median DOR † >10.6 months
Median PFS 4.6 months
Vij R, et al. Blood. 2012; 119(24):5661-70. Vij R, et al. Br J Haematol. 2012 Sep;158(6):739-48.
Bortezomib-naïve Cohort 1 (20 mg/m2)
n = 59
Cohort 2 (20→27 mg/m2)
n = 67
ORR (CR + VGPR + PR) 42.4% 52.2%
CBR 59.3% 64.2%
CR 3.4% 1.5%
VGPR 13.6% 26.9%
Median TTP 8.3 mo Not reached
Median DOR* 13.1 mo Not reached
Median PFS 8.2 mo Not reached
†Precise estimate not determined since 4/6 patients with responses had DOR censored at study close
* Calculated for ORR patients
Dose Escalation of Carfilzomib
• CFZ 30-minute IV infusion on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 + DEX 8
mg premedication (28-day cycle)
– Cycle 1, day 1 and 2 20 mg/m2 followed by escalation to 56 mg/m2
• 78% BTZ-refractory; 21% prior alloHSCT
• Results (N=34)
– ORR (completed 4 cycles or PD prior to 4 cycles): 58% (1 CR, 7
VGPR, 6 PR)
– ORR (after 4 cycles): 57% (BTZ-refractory)
– ORR (ITT): 50%
– Median PFS: 4.6 months
– Median OS: not reached (median follow-up 9.6 months)
• 35% patients required a dose reduction
Lendvai N, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 947.
Dose Escalation of Carfilzomib is
Feasible
• CFZ 30-minute IV infusion on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16
– Cycle 1 (Day 1/2) 20 mg/m2 → escalation to 45 or 56 mg/m2
• DEX 20 mg prior to CFZ on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16
– DEX 40 mg administered on Day 22
• Median 4 lines treatment; 96% patients prior BTZ
• Results (in patients completing at least 2 cycles); n=20
– ORR: 55% (VGPR: n=2; PR: n=9); SD: n=6; PD: n=3
– Discontinued due to PD: N=7 (45 mg/m2)
– Discontinued due to SAE: N=1 (56 mg/m2)
Badros AZ, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 4036.
MLN9708 and Marizomib
Agent MTD N Response Toxicity Notes
MLN9708
(2x weekly)
2.0 mg/m2 orally 46 13% ≥ PR
2% CR
2% MR
61% SD
DLT: rash, nausea, vomiting
Common: thrombocytopenia, GI,
rash, fatigue
≥ Gr 3: vomiting, DVT, anemia,
rash, thrombocytopenia
PN: 11% gr 1/2; 0% gr 3
MLN9708
(1x weekly)
2.97 mg/m2 orally 32 6 % ≥ PR
25% SD
Marizomib
(NPI-0052)
0.4 mg/m2 IV over 60 min
0.5 mg/m2 IV over 120 min
21 15% ≥ MR
55% SD
DLT: transient hallucinations,
cognitive changes, loss of balance
(all reversible)
Common: headache, GI,
insomnia, dizziness, dyspnea
No PN or myelosuppression
Richardson PG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):301. Berdeja JG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):479.
Richardson PG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):302.
MTD, maximum tolerated dose; PR, partial response; CR, complete response; MR, marginal response; SD, stable disease; GI, gastrointestinal;
Gr, grade; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; DLT, dose limiting toxicity; PN, peripheral neuropathy; min, minute.
Oprozomib (ONX 0912) Phase 1b Study
Design
Phase 1b open-label dose escalation study
Oprozomib BID Days 1 – 5 of a 14
day cycle
Starting dose 60 mg BID (doses
administered at least 4-6 hours apart)
Escalation in 30 mg increments
Hematologic malignancies
3 + 3 dose-escalation schema
• Primary endpoint:
• Safety and tolerability and to determine the maximum
tolerated dose
• Secondary endpoints
• Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses
Savona MR, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 203.
Confidential: For Internal Use Only
Lenalidomide
15-25 mg/d
Myelosuppression
Skin rash
DVT
N
N
H
O O
O
NH2
Structurally similar, but functionally different both qualitatively
and quantitatively
N
N
O
O
O
O
Thalidomide
100-200 mg/d
Neuropathy
Constipation
Sedation
DVT
Pomalidomide
1-4 mg/d
N
O
O
N
H
O
O
NH2
Pomalidomide
MM-002: Phase 2 Study Design
• Primary endpoint: PFS
• Secondary endpoints: ORR,1,2 safety, DOR, OS
• Stratification factors: Age (≤75 vs >75 yrs), prior THAL, and 2 vs >2 prior treatments
19
Aspirin (80–100 mg) or equivalent was mandated for all patients
* Patients aged > 75 years had a starting DEX dose of 20 mg/week.
Randomization
Option to add
LoDEX*
(40 mg/week)
Discontinue and
follow up for
survival and
subsequent
treatment
Progressive
disease
Progressive
diseasePOM (4 mg days 1–21 of
28-day cycles) + LoDEX*
(40 mg/week)
POM (4 mg days 1–21
of 28-day cycles)
DOR, duration of response; G-CSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; LoDEX, low-dose dexamethasone; ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival;
PFS, progression-free survival; POM, pomalidomide; RBC, red blood cell; yrs, years.
1. Bladé J, et al. Br J Haematol. 1998;102:1115-23; 2. Richardson PG, et al. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2609-17.
Progressive
disease
• Patients in both arms were heavily pretreated with a median of 5 prior therapies
• Median number of cycles received was 5 (range 1-17)
• Disease control (≥SD) was observed in 76% of overall patients
Variable
Pom Alone
(n = 108)
Pom + LoDex
(n = 113) Hazard Ratio
ORR (≥PR) (%) 9 30 -
Median DOR (≥PR) , months Not reached 7.4 -
≥MR 25 45 -
CR 0 1 -
PR 9 29 -
MR 16 15 -
SD 46 35 -
PD 16 6 -
Median time to ORR (≥PR), months 2.0 1.9 -
Median PFS, months 2.5 3.8 HR=0.73 (P=0.037)
Median OS, months 13.6 14.4 HR=0.85 (P=0.449)
Pomalidomide Alone or With
Low-Dose Dexamethasone in RRMM
Efficacy
Responses assessed by IRAC review using EBMT criteria. ITT Population.
Vij R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8016.
Discrepancies in totals are due to rounding.
Len
refractory
(n = 87)
BTZ refractory
(n = 82)
Len-BTZ
refractory
(n=69)
Len-BTZ
refractory +
prior
transplant
(n=47)
ORR (≥PR), % 25 29 28 34
≥MR 41 46 46 53
CR 0 0 0 0
PR 25 29 28 34
MR 16 17 19 19
SD, % 40 33 35 28
PD, % 7 7 7 6
Time to ≥PR, mo 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.6
Median DOR (≥PR), mo 7.0 5.8 6.2 5.7
Median duration of MR only, mo 3.4 3.2 3.0 5.7
OS 14.4 13.4 13.5 Not reached
Pomalidomide Alone or With
Low-Dose Dexamethasone in RRMM
Efficacy in Refractory Patients
Vij R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8016.
Patients could be classified under more than one category. Discrepancies in totals are due to rounding.
Response to Pomalidomide + Low Dose
Dexamethasone According to Age
≤ 65 years
N=62
>65 years
N=51
Overall
N=113
≥PR, % 31 37 34
≥MR, % 47 43 45
Median duration of
response, mo*
10.1 7.7 8.3
Median PFS, mo 4.7 3.7 4.6
Median OS, mo 19.7 11.8 16.5
*For patients who achieved ≥PR.
MR, minimal response; PR, partial response.
Jagannath S, et al. Blood. 2012; 120. Abstract 450 (oral presentation).
Confidential: For Internal Use Only
Mayo Clinic Studies
Pomalidomide / Dexamethasone by Previous Therapy
Cohort N Pom
(mg/day)
Prior
therapies
ORR
(%)
≥ MR
(%)
DOR
(mo)
PFS
(mo)
OS
(mo)
1: 1-3 prior therapies 60 2 2 (1-3) 65 67 21 13.0 40 mo
2: Len refractory 34 2 4 (1-14) 32 44 9 5.0 27 mo
3: Bor/len refractory 35 2 6 (3-9) 26 49 16 6.5 17 mo
4: Bor/len refractory 35 4 6 (2-11) 29 43 3 3.3 9 mo
5: Len refractory 1-3
prior therapies
60 4 2 (1-5) 38 57 N/A 7.9 N/A
Lacy MQ, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):3963.
ORR, overall response rate; MR, marginal response; DOR, duration of response; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall
survival; len, lenalidomide; bor, bortezomib; Pom, pomalidomide; mo, month; N/A, not applicable.
Pomalidomide / Dexamethasone:
Administration Schedule
21 / 28
n = 43
28 / 28
n = 41
Total
N = 84
ORR 35% 34% 34.5%
Stable Disease 44% 51% 48%
Median time to 1st response 2.7 mo 1.1 mo 1.8 mo
Median DOR 10.5 mo 7.2 mo 8.1 mo
≥ 1 yr in responders 47.5% 36% 37.5%
Leleu X. et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):812.
MM, multiple myeloma; 21/28, 21 days of 4 mg pomalidomide on a 28-day cycle; 28/28, 28 days of 4 mg pomalidomide
on a 28-day cycle; ORR, overall response rate; DOR, duration of response.
Pomalidomide plus Low Dose Dex vs. High
Dose Dex
• Primary endpoint: PFS
• Secondary endpoints: safety, OS, ORR (≥PR), DoR, TTP, QoL
Continue treatment until PD or unacceptable toxicity
Arm B: High dose DEX (n=153)
Dexamethasone: 40 mg, D 1-4, 9-12,
and 17-20
28-day cycles
Arm A: POM – loDEX (n=302)
Pomalidomide 4mg/day D1-21
Dexamethasone: 40 mg, D1, 8,15,22
28-day cycles
Randomization (N=455) 2:1
Primary refractory or relapsed and refractory MM
PD during treatment or within 60 days of last MM treatment
(including ≥ cycles LEN or BTZ)
Dimopoulos M, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract LBA-6.
Patients were stratified by age (≤ 75 vs > 75 years), disease population (refractory vs refractory and relapsed vs refractory and intolerant
[intolerant to BTZ only]), and number of prior therapies (2 vs > 2).
Pomalidomide + Low Dose Dex vs.
High Dose Dex
• Patient population
– Median number of prior therapies: 5 (range, 1-17)
– Refractory to both LEN and BTZ: 72%
• Treatment results
Characteristic
Arm A
POM+loDEX
Arm B
High DEX
Treatment duration (median), wks 12.4 8
Remain on study, % 45 25
Deceased, % 25 38
Dimopoulos M, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract LBA-6.
Pomalidomide + Low Dose Dex vs.
High Dose Dex
• Efficacy
Characteristic
Arm A
POM+loDEX
Arm B
High DEX
Progression-free survival, wks 15.7 8*
Overall survival, wks Not reached 34*
*P<.001
Safety
Characteristic, %
Arm A
POM+loDEX
Arm B
High DEX
Neutropenia 42 15
Thrombocytopenia 21 24
Febrile neutropenia 7 0
Infection 24 23
1% of patients in each group developed neuropathy (Grade 3/4); 1% Arm A
developed VTE.
Dimopoulos M, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract LBA-6.
Immunomodulatory Agents
Immunomodulatory
Tumor micro-environment
CEREBLON BINDING
↓
IRF-4
Direct anti-tumor effects
T cell co-
stimulation
Treg suppression
Th1 cytokine
NK and NKT cell
activation
ADCC
Induce p21, p27, & p15
cell cycle arrest
Alterations in (ERG)-1,2 3
and SPARC
↓ NFkB
Inhibit caspase 3,8,9
Anti-angiogenesis
Anti-inflammatory
↓ adhesion molecules
Anti-osteoclastogenic
Tai YT, et al. Cancer Res. 2005;65(13):5898-5906. Hideshima T, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(24 Pt 1):8530-8533. Catley
L, et al. Blood. 2006;108(10):3441-3449.
Blockade of Ubiquitinated Protein
Catabolism with HDAC inhibitors
HDAC6
HDAC6
HDAC6
Protein
Protein aggregates
(toxic)
Ub
26S Proteasome
Ub Ub
Ub
Aggresome
Tubacin
LBH, vorinostat
Dynein
Dynein
Microtubule
Autophagy
Bortezomib
Ub Ub
Ub
Lysosome
Ub
Ub
Ub
Ub
UbUb
Ub
Ub Ub
Vorinostat / Bortezomib
VANTAGE 088, Phase III
Bortezomib +
Placebo
Bortezomib +
Vorinostat
Multiple Myeloma
1-3 Prior Therapies
N = 637
R
Bortezomib +
Vorinostat
Bortezomib +
Placebo
P
ORR 56% 41% < 0.0001
CBR 71% 54% < 0.0001
Median PFS 7.63 mo 6.83 mo < 0.01
Median OS NR 28.1 mo 0.35
Dimopoulos MA, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):811.
ORR, overall response rate; CBR, clinical benefit rate; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival.
PANORAMA 2 Study Design
Phase II, Simon 2-stage study in BTZ-refractory MM
a Response measured according to modified European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation 1998 criteria.
CR, complete response; nCR, near CR; DOR, duration of response; OS, overall survival; PD, disease progression;
PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; TTP, time to progression; TTR, time to response.
• Adult pts
• Relapsed and
BTZ-refractory MM
• ≥ 2 prior lines of
therapy
• Exposed to IMiDs
Panobinostat
BTZ
Dexamethasone
Panobinostat
BTZ
Dexamethasone
Screening
Treatment Phase 1
Eight 3-wk cycles
Treatment Phase 2
6-wk cycles until PD
After 8 cycles, continuation into treatment phase
2 in pts with clinical benefit
Primary endpoint: overall response rate (CR + nCR + PR)a
Key secondary endpoints: PFS, TTP, OS, MR, TTR, DOR
Alsina et al. ASCO 2012. ABSTRACT 8012.
Preliminary Response Data
Activity in BTZ-refractory MM patients
Best confirmed response (confirmed at 6 wks) N = 55
Overall response (CR + nCR + PR), n (%) 17 (31)
Complete response –
Near complete response 1 (2)
Partial response 16 (29)
Clinical benefit (CR + nCR + PR + MR), n (%)1-3 28 (51)
Minimal response 11 (20)
• VGPR observed in 3 pts
• Responses were typically observed after 1 to 2 cycles
• Stable disease observed in 3 pts, progressive disease in 18 pts;
3 pts not evaluable, 3 pts with unconfirmed response
1. Anderson KC, et al. Leukemia. 2008;22:231-239. 2. Richardson PG, et al. Br J Haematol. 2009;144:895-903.
3. Niesvizky R, et al. Br J Haematol. 2009;143:46-53.
Alsina et al. ASCO 2012. ABSTRACT 8012.
Current Phase III
PANORAMA I
Placebo
Bortezomib
Dexamethasone
Panobinostat
Bortezomib
Dexamethasone
Relapsed or
Refractory MM
R
National Institutes of Health. Available at: www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed March 2011.
Clinical trial ID: NCT01023308
Trial has met accrual goals
Perifosine / Bortezomib / Dex
N = 73
CR 4%
PR 13%
MR 19%
SD 41%
Median PFS 6.4 months
Median OS 25 months
MM, multiple myeloma; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; MR, marginal response; SD, stable disease; PFS, progression-free survival;
OS, overall survival; dex, dexamethasone.
AKT Inhibitors
Perifosine, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone
Richardson PG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):815.
 Common grade 1/2 AE
• Nausea, diarrhea, fatigue and musculoskeletal pain, upper respiratory infection, anorexia,
constipation
 Grade 3/4 AE
• Thrombocytopenia (23%), neutropenia (15%), anemia (14%), pneumonia (12%), musculoskeletal pain
(11%), bleeding (10%)
MONOCLONAL ANTIBODIES
• CS1 is highly and uniformly expressed on MM cells
– Restricted expression on NK cells
– Little to no expression on normal tissues
• In an MM xenograft mouse model lenalidomide enhanced the anti-tumor
effect of elotuzumab
Elotuzumab: Anti-CS1
Hsi ED, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(9):2775-2784. Tai YT, et al. Blood. 2008;112(4):1329-1337. van Rhee F, et al. Mol Cancer
Ther. 2009;8(9):2616-2624. Lonial S, et al. Blood. 2009;114. Abstract 432.
MM, multiple myeloma; NK, natural killer.
Elotuzumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone
in RR Lenalidomide-naïve MM
RRMM
Phase 2
(1 – 3 prior
therapies)
Elotuzumab (10 mg)
Lenalidomide
Dexamethasone
Elotuzumab (20 mg)
Lenalidomide
Dexamethasone
Elotuzumab:10 or 20 mg/kg IV, d1, 8, 15, 22 cycles 1-2; d1, 15 for subsequent cycles
Lenalidomide: 25 mg, daily, days 1-21
Dexamethasone: 40 mg, weekly.
Premedication Regimen: 30-60 minutes prior to each elotuzumab infusion
Methylprednisolone 50 mg IV or dexamethasone 8 mg IV, diphenhydramine 25-50 mg PO or
IV (or equivalent), ranitidine 50 mg IV (or equivalent), acetaminophen 650-1000 mg PO
Richardson P, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 202.
Moreau P, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30. Abstract 8020.
Best Response
(IMWG Criteria)
Elotuzumab
10 mg/kg
n = 36
Elotuzumab
20 mg/kg
n = 37
Total
N = 73
ORR (≥ PR)1 92% 76% 84%
CR / stringent CR2 14% 11% 12%
VGPR2 47% 35% 41%
Median PFS1 26.9 mo 18.6 mo 25 mo
CR, complete response; IMWG, International Myeloma Working Group; ORR, objective response rate; PFS, progression-free
survival; PR, partial response; VGPR, very good partial response; len / dex, lenalidomide and dexamethasone.
Historical Controls N ORR to len / dex* CR to len / dex
MM009, Weber et al.3 177 61% 14%
MM010, Dimopoulos et al.4 106 60% 16%
*High-dose dex.
1. Richardson P, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 202 (oral presentation). 2. Moreau P, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30 (15 suppl):8020. 3. Weber
DM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2133-2142. 4. Dimopoulos M, et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2123-2132.
Elotuzumab, Lenalidomide, Dex in RR
Lenalidomide-naïve MM
Confidential: For Internal Use Only
Siltuximab + BTZ vs BTZ Alone in
Relapsed/Refractory MM
• Siltuximab: chimeric IgG1k anti–human IL-6 antibody
– High affinity, half-life ≈ 3 wks
– Tolerability: no DLT up to ≥ 15 mg/kg
• Study design: phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
– Patients:1-3 previous lines of therapy; no previous BTZ
– Treatment
– BTZ 1.3 mg/m2, 8 x 42-day cycles on Days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32
followed by maintenance, 4 x 35-day cycles on Days 1, 8, 15, 22
– Placebo or siltuximab 6 mg/kg every 2 wks
– Patients progressing had option to end BTZ and start DEX 40 mg on Days 1-4, 9-
12, 17-20 and maintenance therapy at 40 mg on Days 1-4
Orlowski R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8018.
Siltuximab + BTZ Efficacy
• Nonsignificant trend toward improved ORR with
siltuximab
• Nonsignificant, marginal effect on overall PFS
• Regional differences in PFS noted
– Significant increase in NA and WE (P = .01) vs no effect
for rest of world
– Patients outside of NA and WE less often
pretreated, which was thought to obviate benefit of
adding siltuximab
• Siltuximab continues to be developed for frontline
therapy
Orlowski R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8018.
Daratumumab: Phase I/II Study in
Relapsed/Refractory MM
• Daratumumab: anti-CD38 antibody; kills MM cells via
ADCC, CDC, and induction of apoptosis
• Patients: relapsed/refractory MM (≥ 2 different
therapies), not eligible for ASCT; 3 patients/dosing group
• Efficacy based on serum and/or urine M-component
analyses
• At the highest dose (4 mg/kg), patients had a
49%, 55%, and 64% reduction in serum M-component
and a 80%, 89%, and 97% reduction in plasma cells
• Adverse events were manageable
Plesner T, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8019.
Targeting Myeloma Cells
in the Bone Marrow Microenvironment
Bone marrow
Targeting MM cell
stromal cells
Targeting bone marrow milieu
Proteosome Inhibitors (CEP 18770,
NPI 0052, MLN 2238)
Other targets
FGFR3
IGF-1
Hsp-90
DAC
PI-3-Akt-Mtor,
bcl-2
CDK
IKK /p38MAPK
Aurora kinases
Met
HGF
Monoclonal antibodies( CD 138,
CD40, CD56,1L-6, TRAIL-R)
•Massively parallel sequencing of 38 tumor genomes and their comparison to
matched normal DNAs.
•Mutation of :
•genes involved in protein translation (seen in nearly half of the patients),
•genes involved in histone methylation,
•genes involved in blood coagulation.
•in 11 members of the NF-kB pathway
•kinase BRAF in 4%of patients,
4 M A R C H 2 0 1 1 | VO L 4 7 1 | N AT U R E | 4 6 7
Key Genetic Changes
Whole-genome sequencing of multiple myeloma from diagnosis to plasma cell
leukemia reveals genomic initiating events, evolution, and clonal tides
Egan et al Blood. 2012;120(5):1060-1066)
Clonal competition with alternating
dominance in multiple myeloma
( Keats et al. Blood. 2012;120(5):1067-1076)
47
The Goal: CureTumorVolume→
Time →
Ineffective treatment
High-Dose Therapy
Alkylators
Dexamethasone
Goal of newer
therapy options
Limit of
detection

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)
Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)
Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)Ashfaq9697931281
 
Role of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present era
Role of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present eraRole of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present era
Role of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present eraAlok Gupta
 
Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)
Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)
Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)madurai
 
thalassemia
thalassemiathalassemia
thalassemiaspa718
 
LHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancer
LHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancerLHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancer
LHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancerAlok Gupta
 
V_Hematology_Forum_Prof_Lowenberg
V_Hematology_Forum_Prof_LowenbergV_Hematology_Forum_Prof_Lowenberg
V_Hematology_Forum_Prof_LowenbergEAFO1
 
Genetics in prostate cancer
Genetics in prostate cancerGenetics in prostate cancer
Genetics in prostate cancerAlok Gupta
 
Newly Diagnosed Myeloma
Newly Diagnosed MyelomaNewly Diagnosed Myeloma
Newly Diagnosed Myelomaspa718
 
Elderly AML by Mohamad Mohty
Elderly AML by Mohamad MohtyElderly AML by Mohamad Mohty
Elderly AML by Mohamad Mohtyspa718
 
TKI discontinuation in CML
TKI discontinuation in CMLTKI discontinuation in CML
TKI discontinuation in CMLspa718
 
Multidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias aml
Multidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias    amlMultidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias    aml
Multidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias amlmadurai
 
Molecular mechanisms in crpc
Molecular mechanisms in crpcMolecular mechanisms in crpc
Molecular mechanisms in crpcAlok Gupta
 
Relapsed Myeloma
Relapsed MyelomaRelapsed Myeloma
Relapsed Myelomaspa718
 
IMATINIB RESISTANT CML
IMATINIB RESISTANT CMLIMATINIB RESISTANT CML
IMATINIB RESISTANT CMLspa718
 
Bortezomib as standard of care for multiple myeloma
Bortezomib as standard of care for multiple myelomaBortezomib as standard of care for multiple myeloma
Bortezomib as standard of care for multiple myelomaspa718
 
Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?
Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?
Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?spa718
 
Lymphoma: Treatment Updates
Lymphoma: Treatment UpdatesLymphoma: Treatment Updates
Lymphoma: Treatment Updatesspa718
 

Mais procurados (17)

Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)
Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)
Metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer(mCRPC)
 
Role of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present era
Role of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present eraRole of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present era
Role of Stem cell transplant in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in present era
 
Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)
Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)
Panel discussion hemat onco update (1)
 
thalassemia
thalassemiathalassemia
thalassemia
 
LHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancer
LHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancerLHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancer
LHRH agonist vs antagonist in prostate cancer
 
V_Hematology_Forum_Prof_Lowenberg
V_Hematology_Forum_Prof_LowenbergV_Hematology_Forum_Prof_Lowenberg
V_Hematology_Forum_Prof_Lowenberg
 
Genetics in prostate cancer
Genetics in prostate cancerGenetics in prostate cancer
Genetics in prostate cancer
 
Newly Diagnosed Myeloma
Newly Diagnosed MyelomaNewly Diagnosed Myeloma
Newly Diagnosed Myeloma
 
Elderly AML by Mohamad Mohty
Elderly AML by Mohamad MohtyElderly AML by Mohamad Mohty
Elderly AML by Mohamad Mohty
 
TKI discontinuation in CML
TKI discontinuation in CMLTKI discontinuation in CML
TKI discontinuation in CML
 
Multidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias aml
Multidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias    amlMultidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias    aml
Multidisciplinary approach to the management of leukemias aml
 
Molecular mechanisms in crpc
Molecular mechanisms in crpcMolecular mechanisms in crpc
Molecular mechanisms in crpc
 
Relapsed Myeloma
Relapsed MyelomaRelapsed Myeloma
Relapsed Myeloma
 
IMATINIB RESISTANT CML
IMATINIB RESISTANT CMLIMATINIB RESISTANT CML
IMATINIB RESISTANT CML
 
Bortezomib as standard of care for multiple myeloma
Bortezomib as standard of care for multiple myelomaBortezomib as standard of care for multiple myeloma
Bortezomib as standard of care for multiple myeloma
 
Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?
Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?
Is it time to consider targeted therapy in combination for newly diagnosed AML?
 
Lymphoma: Treatment Updates
Lymphoma: Treatment UpdatesLymphoma: Treatment Updates
Lymphoma: Treatment Updates
 

Destaque

Management of multiple myeloma
Management of multiple myelomaManagement of multiple myeloma
Management of multiple myelomaDR Saqib Shah
 
Role of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
Role of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell DyscrasiasRole of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
Role of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell DyscrasiasApollo Hospitals
 
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION   MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION spa718
 
オンコロジストなるためのスキル
オンコロジストなるためのスキルオンコロジストなるためのスキル
オンコロジストなるためのスキルmusako-oncology
 
Carfilzomib: new standard of care for myeloma
Carfilzomib: new standard of care for myelomaCarfilzomib: new standard of care for myeloma
Carfilzomib: new standard of care for myelomaspa718
 
Mieloma múltiple
Mieloma múltipleMieloma múltiple
Mieloma múltipleMely Trejo
 
Multiple Myeloma
Multiple MyelomaMultiple Myeloma
Multiple MyelomaAlan Teh
 
Molecular pathology of lymphoma by dr ramesh
Molecular pathology of  lymphoma by dr ramesh Molecular pathology of  lymphoma by dr ramesh
Molecular pathology of lymphoma by dr ramesh Ramesh Purohit
 

Destaque (20)

Management of multiple myeloma
Management of multiple myelomaManagement of multiple myeloma
Management of multiple myeloma
 
Multiple Myeloma
Multiple MyelomaMultiple Myeloma
Multiple Myeloma
 
Multiple myeloma
Multiple myelomaMultiple myeloma
Multiple myeloma
 
Update on plasma cell myeloma
Update on plasma cell myelomaUpdate on plasma cell myeloma
Update on plasma cell myeloma
 
1997 dergee certificate
1997 dergee certificate1997 dergee certificate
1997 dergee certificate
 
Role of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
Role of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell DyscrasiasRole of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
Role of Flow Cytometric Immunophenotyping in Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
 
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION   MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION
MULTIPLE MYELOMA RISK STRATIFICATION
 
multiple myeloma
multiple myelomamultiple myeloma
multiple myeloma
 
Sakata
SakataSakata
Sakata
 
Mieloma Multiple
Mieloma MultipleMieloma Multiple
Mieloma Multiple
 
オンコロジストなるためのスキル
オンコロジストなるためのスキルオンコロジストなるためのスキル
オンコロジストなるためのスキル
 
25jsphcs S33-5
25jsphcs S33-525jsphcs S33-5
25jsphcs S33-5
 
Carfilzomib: new standard of care for myeloma
Carfilzomib: new standard of care for myelomaCarfilzomib: new standard of care for myeloma
Carfilzomib: new standard of care for myeloma
 
Mieloma múltiple
Mieloma múltipleMieloma múltiple
Mieloma múltiple
 
Mieloma múltiple
Mieloma múltipleMieloma múltiple
Mieloma múltiple
 
Multiple Myeloma
Multiple MyelomaMultiple Myeloma
Multiple Myeloma
 
Revisión mieloma multiple 2013
Revisión mieloma multiple 2013 Revisión mieloma multiple 2013
Revisión mieloma multiple 2013
 
Molecular pathology of lymphoma by dr ramesh
Molecular pathology of  lymphoma by dr ramesh Molecular pathology of  lymphoma by dr ramesh
Molecular pathology of lymphoma by dr ramesh
 
Mieloma Múltiple
Mieloma MúltipleMieloma Múltiple
Mieloma Múltiple
 
Multiple myeloma
Multiple myelomaMultiple myeloma
Multiple myeloma
 

Semelhante a Changing Landscape of Treatment for Multiple Myeloma

7 neelapu
7 neelapu7 neelapu
7 neelapuspa718
 
Role of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPC
Role of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPCRole of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPC
Role of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPCMohamed Abdulla
 
Management of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancer
Management of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancerManagement of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancer
Management of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancerkoustavmajumder1986
 
Renal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of Care
Renal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of CareRenal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of Care
Renal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of Carefondas vakalis
 
Relapse Myeloma
Relapse MyelomaRelapse Myeloma
Relapse Myelomaspa718
 
Sequencing therapy for crcp a practical approach
Sequencing therapy for crcp  a practical approachSequencing therapy for crcp  a practical approach
Sequencing therapy for crcp a practical approachMohamed Abdulla
 
Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014
Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014
Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014Chandan K Das
 
ECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCC
ECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCCECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCC
ECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCCEuropean School of Oncology
 
Estado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásico
Estado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásicoEstado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásico
Estado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásicoMauricio Lema
 
M rcc reempowering an old dogma
M rcc reempowering an old dogmaM rcc reempowering an old dogma
M rcc reempowering an old dogmaMohamed Abdulla
 
Recent advances in mds
Recent advances in mdsRecent advances in mds
Recent advances in mdsmadurai
 
Recent advances in mds
Recent advances in mdsRecent advances in mds
Recent advances in mdsmadurai
 
Lupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El Kosi
Lupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El KosiLupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El Kosi
Lupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El KosiMNDU net
 
Orlowski mm rel_ref_celgene
Orlowski mm rel_ref_celgeneOrlowski mm rel_ref_celgene
Orlowski mm rel_ref_celgenespa718
 
Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014
Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014
Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014Martín Lázaro
 
Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Triple Negative Breast CancerTriple Negative Breast Cancer
Triple Negative Breast CancerMohamed Abdulla
 
Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approach
Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approachSoft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approach
Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approachMohamed Abdulla
 

Semelhante a Changing Landscape of Treatment for Multiple Myeloma (20)

Carfilzomib in multiple myeloma
Carfilzomib in multiple myelomaCarfilzomib in multiple myeloma
Carfilzomib in multiple myeloma
 
7 neelapu
7 neelapu7 neelapu
7 neelapu
 
Role of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPC
Role of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPCRole of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPC
Role of Apalutamide in management of M0 CRPC
 
Management of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancer
Management of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancerManagement of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancer
Management of Metastatic Her2 positive breast cancer
 
Renal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of Care
Renal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of CareRenal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of Care
Renal Cell Carcinoma A New Standard Of Care
 
Relapse Myeloma
Relapse MyelomaRelapse Myeloma
Relapse Myeloma
 
Sequencing therapy for crcp a practical approach
Sequencing therapy for crcp  a practical approachSequencing therapy for crcp  a practical approach
Sequencing therapy for crcp a practical approach
 
Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014
Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014
Palumbo auto hsct in multiple myeloma n engl j med 2014
 
ECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCC
ECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCCECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCC
ECCLU 2011 - B.I. Rini - Kidney cancer - First and further lines in mRCC
 
Estado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásico
Estado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásicoEstado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásico
Estado actual de terapia sistémica en cáncer renal metastásico
 
M rcc reempowering an old dogma
M rcc reempowering an old dogmaM rcc reempowering an old dogma
M rcc reempowering an old dogma
 
Cáncer de Mama
Cáncer de MamaCáncer de Mama
Cáncer de Mama
 
Recent advances in mds
Recent advances in mdsRecent advances in mds
Recent advances in mds
 
Recent advances in mds
Recent advances in mdsRecent advances in mds
Recent advances in mds
 
Lupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El Kosi
Lupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El KosiLupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El Kosi
Lupus Nephritis Dilemma - Prof. Mohsen El Kosi
 
Orlowski mm rel_ref_celgene
Orlowski mm rel_ref_celgeneOrlowski mm rel_ref_celgene
Orlowski mm rel_ref_celgene
 
Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014
Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014
Nuevos tratº cáncer renal 2014
 
Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Triple Negative Breast CancerTriple Negative Breast Cancer
Triple Negative Breast Cancer
 
Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approach
Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approachSoft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approach
Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Can we refine the approach
 
NET - Kennecke
NET - KenneckeNET - Kennecke
NET - Kennecke
 

Mais de spa718

1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai
1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai
1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotaispa718
 
Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery
Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery
Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery spa718
 
Controversies in Colorectal Cancer
Controversies in Colorectal CancerControversies in Colorectal Cancer
Controversies in Colorectal Cancerspa718
 
Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic CancerPancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancerspa718
 
Chemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancer
Chemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancerChemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancer
Chemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancerspa718
 
Cholangiocarcinoma
CholangiocarcinomaCholangiocarcinoma
Cholangiocarcinomaspa718
 
Immunotherapy for Colorectal Cancer
Immunotherapy for Colorectal CancerImmunotherapy for Colorectal Cancer
Immunotherapy for Colorectal Cancerspa718
 
Surgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Surgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung CancerSurgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Surgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung Cancerspa718
 
Role of Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer
Role of Radiation Therapy for Lung CancerRole of Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer
Role of Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancerspa718
 
Update on Management of Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Update on Management of Triple Negative Breast CancerUpdate on Management of Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Update on Management of Triple Negative Breast Cancerspa718
 
Technical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) Cancer
Technical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) CancerTechnical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) Cancer
Technical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) Cancerspa718
 
Controversies in Surgical Approach to Breast Cancer
Controversies in Surgical Approach to Breast CancerControversies in Surgical Approach to Breast Cancer
Controversies in Surgical Approach to Breast Cancerspa718
 
ImmunoOncology in Lung Cancer
ImmunoOncology in Lung CancerImmunoOncology in Lung Cancer
ImmunoOncology in Lung Cancerspa718
 
Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015
Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015
Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015spa718
 
Updates in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer
Updates in Radiotherapy for Breast CancerUpdates in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer
Updates in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancerspa718
 
Regulatory T Cells and GVHD
Regulatory T Cells and GVHDRegulatory T Cells and GVHD
Regulatory T Cells and GVHDspa718
 
Immunotherapy for Multiple Myeloma
Immunotherapy for Multiple MyelomaImmunotherapy for Multiple Myeloma
Immunotherapy for Multiple Myelomaspa718
 
NHL immunotherapy
NHL immunotherapyNHL immunotherapy
NHL immunotherapyspa718
 
AML and Cell Therapy
AML and Cell TherapyAML and Cell Therapy
AML and Cell Therapyspa718
 
Acute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment Update
Acute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment UpdateAcute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment Update
Acute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment Updatespa718
 

Mais de spa718 (20)

1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai
1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai
1600 1620 siwanon jirawatnotai
 
Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery
Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery
Controversies in hepato-biliary surgery
 
Controversies in Colorectal Cancer
Controversies in Colorectal CancerControversies in Colorectal Cancer
Controversies in Colorectal Cancer
 
Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic CancerPancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancer
 
Chemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancer
Chemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancerChemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancer
Chemoradiation vs Surgery for rectal cancer
 
Cholangiocarcinoma
CholangiocarcinomaCholangiocarcinoma
Cholangiocarcinoma
 
Immunotherapy for Colorectal Cancer
Immunotherapy for Colorectal CancerImmunotherapy for Colorectal Cancer
Immunotherapy for Colorectal Cancer
 
Surgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Surgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung CancerSurgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
Surgical Approach to Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
 
Role of Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer
Role of Radiation Therapy for Lung CancerRole of Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer
Role of Radiation Therapy for Lung Cancer
 
Update on Management of Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Update on Management of Triple Negative Breast CancerUpdate on Management of Triple Negative Breast Cancer
Update on Management of Triple Negative Breast Cancer
 
Technical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) Cancer
Technical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) CancerTechnical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) Cancer
Technical Advances in radiotherapy for Lung (and liver) Cancer
 
Controversies in Surgical Approach to Breast Cancer
Controversies in Surgical Approach to Breast CancerControversies in Surgical Approach to Breast Cancer
Controversies in Surgical Approach to Breast Cancer
 
ImmunoOncology in Lung Cancer
ImmunoOncology in Lung CancerImmunoOncology in Lung Cancer
ImmunoOncology in Lung Cancer
 
Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015
Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015
Breast Cancer Highlights: ASCO 2015
 
Updates in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer
Updates in Radiotherapy for Breast CancerUpdates in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer
Updates in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer
 
Regulatory T Cells and GVHD
Regulatory T Cells and GVHDRegulatory T Cells and GVHD
Regulatory T Cells and GVHD
 
Immunotherapy for Multiple Myeloma
Immunotherapy for Multiple MyelomaImmunotherapy for Multiple Myeloma
Immunotherapy for Multiple Myeloma
 
NHL immunotherapy
NHL immunotherapyNHL immunotherapy
NHL immunotherapy
 
AML and Cell Therapy
AML and Cell TherapyAML and Cell Therapy
AML and Cell Therapy
 
Acute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment Update
Acute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment UpdateAcute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment Update
Acute Lymphoblastic Lymphoma: Treatment Update
 

Último

SGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA .pdf
SGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA    .pdfSGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA    .pdf
SGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA .pdfHongBiThi1
 
Male Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy Dasgupta
Male Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy DasguptaMale Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy Dasgupta
Male Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy DasguptaSujoy Dasgupta
 
ORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS - PART 2.pptx
ORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS  - PART 2.pptxORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS  - PART 2.pptx
ORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS - PART 2.pptxNIKITA BHUTE
 
Adenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosis
Adenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosisAdenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosis
Adenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosisSujoy Dasgupta
 
CPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing student
CPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing studentCPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing student
CPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing studentsaileshpanda05
 
Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.
Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.
Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.Vaikunthan Rajaratnam
 
SGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdfSGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdfHongBiThi1
 
PAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdf
PAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdfPAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdf
PAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdfDolisha Warbi
 
DNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptx
DNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptxDNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptx
DNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptxMAsifAhmad
 
pA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacology
pA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacologypA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacology
pA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacologyDeepakDaniel9
 
historyofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusangu
historyofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusanguhistoryofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusangu
historyofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusangu Medical University
 
CONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdf
CONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdfCONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdf
CONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdfDolisha Warbi
 
SGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdfSGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdfHongBiThi1
 
Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.
Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.
Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.aarjukhadka22
 
Using Data Visualization in Public Health Communications
Using Data Visualization in Public Health CommunicationsUsing Data Visualization in Public Health Communications
Using Data Visualization in Public Health Communicationskatiequigley33
 
Neurological history taking (2024) .
Neurological  history  taking  (2024)  .Neurological  history  taking  (2024)  .
Neurological history taking (2024) .Mohamed Rizk Khodair
 
Mental health Team. Dr Senthil Thirusangu
Mental health Team. Dr Senthil ThirusanguMental health Team. Dr Senthil Thirusangu
Mental health Team. Dr Senthil Thirusangu Medical University
 
power point presentation of Clinical evaluation of strabismus
power point presentation of Clinical evaluation  of strabismuspower point presentation of Clinical evaluation  of strabismus
power point presentation of Clinical evaluation of strabismusChandrasekar Reddy
 
Unit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.ppt
Unit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.pptUnit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.ppt
Unit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.pptPradnya Wadekar
 

Último (20)

GOUT UPDATE AHMED YEHIA 2024, case based approach with application of the lat...
GOUT UPDATE AHMED YEHIA 2024, case based approach with application of the lat...GOUT UPDATE AHMED YEHIA 2024, case based approach with application of the lat...
GOUT UPDATE AHMED YEHIA 2024, case based approach with application of the lat...
 
SGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA .pdf
SGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA    .pdfSGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA    .pdf
SGK NGẠT NƯỚC ĐHYHN RẤT LÀ HAY NHA .pdf
 
Male Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy Dasgupta
Male Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy DasguptaMale Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy Dasgupta
Male Infertility Panel Discussion by Dr Sujoy Dasgupta
 
ORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS - PART 2.pptx
ORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS  - PART 2.pptxORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS  - PART 2.pptx
ORAL HYPOGLYCAEMIC AGENTS - PART 2.pptx
 
Adenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosis
Adenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosisAdenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosis
Adenomyosis or Fibroid- making right diagnosis
 
CPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing student
CPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing studentCPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing student
CPR.nursingoutlook.pdf , Bsc nursing student
 
Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.
Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.
Generative AI in Health Care a scoping review and a persoanl experience.
 
SGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdfSGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN KALI MÁU CỰC KỲ QUAN TRỌNG.pdf
 
PAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdf
PAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdfPAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdf
PAIN/CLASSIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PAIN.pdf
 
DNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptx
DNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptxDNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptx
DNA nucleotides Blast in NCBI and Phylogeny using MEGA Xi.pptx
 
pA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacology
pA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacologypA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacology
pA2 value, Schild plot and pD2 values- applications in pharmacology
 
historyofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusangu
historyofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusanguhistoryofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusangu
historyofpsychiatryinindia. Senthil Thirusangu
 
CONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdf
CONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdfCONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdf
CONNECTIVE TISSUE (ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY).pdf
 
SGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdfSGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdf
SGK RỐI LOẠN TOAN KIỀM ĐHYHN RẤT HAY VÀ ĐẶC SẮC.pdf
 
Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.
Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.
Bulimia nervosa ( Eating Disorders) Mental Health Nursing.
 
Using Data Visualization in Public Health Communications
Using Data Visualization in Public Health CommunicationsUsing Data Visualization in Public Health Communications
Using Data Visualization in Public Health Communications
 
Neurological history taking (2024) .
Neurological  history  taking  (2024)  .Neurological  history  taking  (2024)  .
Neurological history taking (2024) .
 
Mental health Team. Dr Senthil Thirusangu
Mental health Team. Dr Senthil ThirusanguMental health Team. Dr Senthil Thirusangu
Mental health Team. Dr Senthil Thirusangu
 
power point presentation of Clinical evaluation of strabismus
power point presentation of Clinical evaluation  of strabismuspower point presentation of Clinical evaluation  of strabismus
power point presentation of Clinical evaluation of strabismus
 
Unit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.ppt
Unit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.pptUnit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.ppt
Unit I herbs as raw materials, biodynamic agriculture.ppt
 

Changing Landscape of Treatment for Multiple Myeloma

  • 1. Changing Landscape of Treatment for Multiple Myeloma Ravi Vij MD Associate Professor Section of BMT and Leukemia Washington University School of Medicine,
  • 3. Trends in Overall Survival of MM Overall survival 1971–2006 Diagnosis period Median OS 1996–2006 45 months 1971–1996 30 months (P<0.001) Kumar SK, et al. Blood. 2008;111:2516-2520. Time from diagnosis (Months) Survival 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2001–2006 1995–2000 2001–2006 1989–1994 1983–1988 1977–1982 1971–1976 OS, overall survival. 3 M
  • 4. Trends in 10-Year Relative Survival of MM 4 Period estimates of 10-year relative survival of patients with MM by major age groups in defined calendar periods from 1984-1986 to 2002-2004 *Relative survival reflects survival of patients with cancer compared with survival of the general population. Brenner H, et al. Blood. 2008;111:2521-2526. Calendar period 1984- 1986 1987- 1989 1990- 1992 1993- 1995 1996- 1998 1999- 2001 2002- 2004 10-yearrelativesurvival(%)* 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 15-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80+ Age range
  • 5. Surviv al Outcom es from Tim e Zero 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0 12 24 36 48 60 Months from Time Zero Ov erall Surv ival Ev ent-Free Surv ival Ev ents / N 173 / 291 222 / 291 M edian in M onths 9 (7,11) 5 (4,6) Kumar S. EHA 2010 Overall and Event-Free Survival in Patients Relapsing and Refractory to Bortezomib and Thalidomide/Lenalidomide
  • 6. Proteasome Inhibitors in MM R/R: relapsed/refractoryNIH clinical trials. Available at: www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed February 2012. Bortezomib Carfilzomib MLN9708 (oral) CEP-18770 Marizomib ONX 0912 (oral) Phase I Phase II/IIb Phase Ib/II Ph III Heme Malig. R/R R/Rw/ Rd Newly Diagnosed Phase I/II Phase I/II Phase I Phase I/II Accelerated FDA approval R/R Full FDA approval R/R FDA approval 1st-line Optimization in combination with other agents 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2012
  • 7. Differentiation of Proteasome Inhibitors Compound Phase Compound Type Main Enzymatic Site Specificity Dissociation Kinetics t ½ (min) Route of admin. Bortezomib Approved Peptide boronate b5 110 IV Carfilzomib III Peptide epoxyketone b5 Irreversible IV CEP-18770 I Peptide boronate b5 Slowly reversible IV MLN9708 I Peptide boronate b5 18 IV Oral ONX 0912 I Peptide epoxyketone b5 Irreversible Oral NPI-0052 I b-lactone inhibitor b1, b2, b5 Irreversible IV Dick LR and Fleming PE. Drug Discov Today. 2010;15(5/6):243-249. Demo SD, et al. Cancer Res. 2007;67:6383-6391. Parlati F, et al. Blood. 2009;114(16):3439-3447. Miller CP, et al. Blood. 2007;110(1):267-277. Piva R, et al. Blood. 2008;111(5):2765-2775. Kupperman E, et al. Cancer Res. 2010;70(5):1970-1980. Chauhan D, et al. Blood. 2010;116(23):4906-4915. b1: Caspase-like site; b2: Trypsin-like site; b5: Chymotrypsin-like site. NR, not reported.
  • 8. Carfilzomib Monotherapy in Heavily Pre-Treated MM Patients, Phase IIb Carfilzomib 20 mg/m2 days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 every 28 days N = 46 MM: Progressive disease > 2 prior therapy lines for relapsed disease including bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, an alkylating agent, or an anthracycline alone or in combination Carfilzomib Dose escalation to 27 mg/m2 after cycle 1 up to 12 cycles N = 266 003-A0 003-A1 Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012;120(14):2817-25 Primary Endpoints: overall response rate (ORR; ≥ partial response) Secondary Endpoints: clinical benefit response rate (≥ minimal response), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), and safety
  • 9. Carfilzomib Monotherapy in Heavily Pre-Treated MM Patients, Phase IIb Patient Baseline Characteristics N = 266 Median age 63 years (range, 37-87) Median time since diagnosis 5.4 years (range, 0.5-22.3) ECOG < 1 87% Baseline grade 1/2 neuropathy 77% Unfavorable Cytogenetic/FISH Prognostic Markers 28% Median prior lines of therapy > 4 prior lines Median # anti-MM agents PD at study entry Refractory to last therapy Refractory or intolerant to bortezomib & lenalidomide 5 (range, 1-20) 82% 13 (range, 3-45) 100% 95% 80% Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012;120(14):2817-25 *** 266 patients evaluable for safety & 257 evaluable for efficacy (9 patients excluded because of missing baseline and/or post-baseline disease assessment)
  • 10. Carfilzomib Monotherapy in Heavily Pre-Treated MM, 003 Trial N ORR % Median DOR (month) Median OS (month) Median PFS (month) Response-Evaluable Patients 257 23.7% 7.8* 15.6 3.7 Bz + len-refractory 169 15.4% 7.8 11.9 NR Bz + len refractory/intolerant 214 20.1 % 7.4 13.2 NR ORR ≥ partial response * Calculated from 61 patients with partial response or better Bz, bortezomib; len, lenalidomide; imid, lenalidomide or thalidomide; mo, month; NR, not reported. Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012 ;120(14):2817-25. Unfavorable cytogenetics did not significantly impact response rates or DOR
  • 11. Selected Adverse Events With Carfilzomib in Heavily Pre-Treated MM Patients Adverse Event > Grade 3 N = 266 Hematologic: Anemia Thrombocytopenia Lymphopenia Neutropenia 24% 29% 20% 11% Non-hematologic: Fatigue Dyspnea Upper respiratory tract infection Headache 7.5% 3.4% 4.5% 1.9% Other: Febrile neutropenia Peripheral neuropathy* 0.8% 1.1% Siegel DS, et al. Blood. 2012 ;120(14):2817-25. * Grouped PN all events of neuropathy, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral sensory neuropathy, & peripheral motor neuropathy
  • 12. Carfilzomib in MM Patients Following 1-3 Prior Therapies 004, Phase II 1:1 Carfilzomib Cohort 1 20 mg/m2 (all treatment cycles) Relapsed / Refractory Multiple Myeloma 1-3 Prior Therapies N = 164 Carfilzomib Cohort 2 20 mg/m2 (cycle 1)→27 mg/m2 Bortezomib-treated (n=35) Bortezomib-naïve (n=59) Bortezomib-naïve (n=70) Bortezomib-naïve Bortezomib-treated N 129 35 Median age 65 years 63 years Median # prior therapies 2 3 Carfilzomib: IV, days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 every 28 days for up to 12 cycles Vij R, et al. Blood. 2012; 119(24):5661-70. Vij R, et al. Br J Haematol. 2012 Sep;158(6):739-48.
  • 13. Carfilzomib Monotherapy MM Patients With 1-3 Prior Therapies Bortezomib-Treated Cohort 1 (20 mg/m2 Carfilzomib) n = 35 ORR 17.1% CBR (> MR) 31.4% Median TTP 4.6 months Median DOR † >10.6 months Median PFS 4.6 months Vij R, et al. Blood. 2012; 119(24):5661-70. Vij R, et al. Br J Haematol. 2012 Sep;158(6):739-48. Bortezomib-naïve Cohort 1 (20 mg/m2) n = 59 Cohort 2 (20→27 mg/m2) n = 67 ORR (CR + VGPR + PR) 42.4% 52.2% CBR 59.3% 64.2% CR 3.4% 1.5% VGPR 13.6% 26.9% Median TTP 8.3 mo Not reached Median DOR* 13.1 mo Not reached Median PFS 8.2 mo Not reached †Precise estimate not determined since 4/6 patients with responses had DOR censored at study close * Calculated for ORR patients
  • 14. Dose Escalation of Carfilzomib • CFZ 30-minute IV infusion on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 + DEX 8 mg premedication (28-day cycle) – Cycle 1, day 1 and 2 20 mg/m2 followed by escalation to 56 mg/m2 • 78% BTZ-refractory; 21% prior alloHSCT • Results (N=34) – ORR (completed 4 cycles or PD prior to 4 cycles): 58% (1 CR, 7 VGPR, 6 PR) – ORR (after 4 cycles): 57% (BTZ-refractory) – ORR (ITT): 50% – Median PFS: 4.6 months – Median OS: not reached (median follow-up 9.6 months) • 35% patients required a dose reduction Lendvai N, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 947.
  • 15. Dose Escalation of Carfilzomib is Feasible • CFZ 30-minute IV infusion on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 – Cycle 1 (Day 1/2) 20 mg/m2 → escalation to 45 or 56 mg/m2 • DEX 20 mg prior to CFZ on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 – DEX 40 mg administered on Day 22 • Median 4 lines treatment; 96% patients prior BTZ • Results (in patients completing at least 2 cycles); n=20 – ORR: 55% (VGPR: n=2; PR: n=9); SD: n=6; PD: n=3 – Discontinued due to PD: N=7 (45 mg/m2) – Discontinued due to SAE: N=1 (56 mg/m2) Badros AZ, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 4036.
  • 16. MLN9708 and Marizomib Agent MTD N Response Toxicity Notes MLN9708 (2x weekly) 2.0 mg/m2 orally 46 13% ≥ PR 2% CR 2% MR 61% SD DLT: rash, nausea, vomiting Common: thrombocytopenia, GI, rash, fatigue ≥ Gr 3: vomiting, DVT, anemia, rash, thrombocytopenia PN: 11% gr 1/2; 0% gr 3 MLN9708 (1x weekly) 2.97 mg/m2 orally 32 6 % ≥ PR 25% SD Marizomib (NPI-0052) 0.4 mg/m2 IV over 60 min 0.5 mg/m2 IV over 120 min 21 15% ≥ MR 55% SD DLT: transient hallucinations, cognitive changes, loss of balance (all reversible) Common: headache, GI, insomnia, dizziness, dyspnea No PN or myelosuppression Richardson PG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):301. Berdeja JG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):479. Richardson PG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):302. MTD, maximum tolerated dose; PR, partial response; CR, complete response; MR, marginal response; SD, stable disease; GI, gastrointestinal; Gr, grade; DVT, deep vein thrombosis; DLT, dose limiting toxicity; PN, peripheral neuropathy; min, minute.
  • 17. Oprozomib (ONX 0912) Phase 1b Study Design Phase 1b open-label dose escalation study Oprozomib BID Days 1 – 5 of a 14 day cycle Starting dose 60 mg BID (doses administered at least 4-6 hours apart) Escalation in 30 mg increments Hematologic malignancies 3 + 3 dose-escalation schema • Primary endpoint: • Safety and tolerability and to determine the maximum tolerated dose • Secondary endpoints • Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses Savona MR, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 203. Confidential: For Internal Use Only
  • 18. Lenalidomide 15-25 mg/d Myelosuppression Skin rash DVT N N H O O O NH2 Structurally similar, but functionally different both qualitatively and quantitatively N N O O O O Thalidomide 100-200 mg/d Neuropathy Constipation Sedation DVT Pomalidomide 1-4 mg/d N O O N H O O NH2 Pomalidomide
  • 19. MM-002: Phase 2 Study Design • Primary endpoint: PFS • Secondary endpoints: ORR,1,2 safety, DOR, OS • Stratification factors: Age (≤75 vs >75 yrs), prior THAL, and 2 vs >2 prior treatments 19 Aspirin (80–100 mg) or equivalent was mandated for all patients * Patients aged > 75 years had a starting DEX dose of 20 mg/week. Randomization Option to add LoDEX* (40 mg/week) Discontinue and follow up for survival and subsequent treatment Progressive disease Progressive diseasePOM (4 mg days 1–21 of 28-day cycles) + LoDEX* (40 mg/week) POM (4 mg days 1–21 of 28-day cycles) DOR, duration of response; G-CSF, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor; LoDEX, low-dose dexamethasone; ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; POM, pomalidomide; RBC, red blood cell; yrs, years. 1. Bladé J, et al. Br J Haematol. 1998;102:1115-23; 2. Richardson PG, et al. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2609-17. Progressive disease
  • 20. • Patients in both arms were heavily pretreated with a median of 5 prior therapies • Median number of cycles received was 5 (range 1-17) • Disease control (≥SD) was observed in 76% of overall patients Variable Pom Alone (n = 108) Pom + LoDex (n = 113) Hazard Ratio ORR (≥PR) (%) 9 30 - Median DOR (≥PR) , months Not reached 7.4 - ≥MR 25 45 - CR 0 1 - PR 9 29 - MR 16 15 - SD 46 35 - PD 16 6 - Median time to ORR (≥PR), months 2.0 1.9 - Median PFS, months 2.5 3.8 HR=0.73 (P=0.037) Median OS, months 13.6 14.4 HR=0.85 (P=0.449) Pomalidomide Alone or With Low-Dose Dexamethasone in RRMM Efficacy Responses assessed by IRAC review using EBMT criteria. ITT Population. Vij R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8016. Discrepancies in totals are due to rounding.
  • 21. Len refractory (n = 87) BTZ refractory (n = 82) Len-BTZ refractory (n=69) Len-BTZ refractory + prior transplant (n=47) ORR (≥PR), % 25 29 28 34 ≥MR 41 46 46 53 CR 0 0 0 0 PR 25 29 28 34 MR 16 17 19 19 SD, % 40 33 35 28 PD, % 7 7 7 6 Time to ≥PR, mo 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.6 Median DOR (≥PR), mo 7.0 5.8 6.2 5.7 Median duration of MR only, mo 3.4 3.2 3.0 5.7 OS 14.4 13.4 13.5 Not reached Pomalidomide Alone or With Low-Dose Dexamethasone in RRMM Efficacy in Refractory Patients Vij R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8016. Patients could be classified under more than one category. Discrepancies in totals are due to rounding.
  • 22. Response to Pomalidomide + Low Dose Dexamethasone According to Age ≤ 65 years N=62 >65 years N=51 Overall N=113 ≥PR, % 31 37 34 ≥MR, % 47 43 45 Median duration of response, mo* 10.1 7.7 8.3 Median PFS, mo 4.7 3.7 4.6 Median OS, mo 19.7 11.8 16.5 *For patients who achieved ≥PR. MR, minimal response; PR, partial response. Jagannath S, et al. Blood. 2012; 120. Abstract 450 (oral presentation). Confidential: For Internal Use Only
  • 23. Mayo Clinic Studies Pomalidomide / Dexamethasone by Previous Therapy Cohort N Pom (mg/day) Prior therapies ORR (%) ≥ MR (%) DOR (mo) PFS (mo) OS (mo) 1: 1-3 prior therapies 60 2 2 (1-3) 65 67 21 13.0 40 mo 2: Len refractory 34 2 4 (1-14) 32 44 9 5.0 27 mo 3: Bor/len refractory 35 2 6 (3-9) 26 49 16 6.5 17 mo 4: Bor/len refractory 35 4 6 (2-11) 29 43 3 3.3 9 mo 5: Len refractory 1-3 prior therapies 60 4 2 (1-5) 38 57 N/A 7.9 N/A Lacy MQ, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):3963. ORR, overall response rate; MR, marginal response; DOR, duration of response; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; len, lenalidomide; bor, bortezomib; Pom, pomalidomide; mo, month; N/A, not applicable.
  • 24. Pomalidomide / Dexamethasone: Administration Schedule 21 / 28 n = 43 28 / 28 n = 41 Total N = 84 ORR 35% 34% 34.5% Stable Disease 44% 51% 48% Median time to 1st response 2.7 mo 1.1 mo 1.8 mo Median DOR 10.5 mo 7.2 mo 8.1 mo ≥ 1 yr in responders 47.5% 36% 37.5% Leleu X. et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):812. MM, multiple myeloma; 21/28, 21 days of 4 mg pomalidomide on a 28-day cycle; 28/28, 28 days of 4 mg pomalidomide on a 28-day cycle; ORR, overall response rate; DOR, duration of response.
  • 25. Pomalidomide plus Low Dose Dex vs. High Dose Dex • Primary endpoint: PFS • Secondary endpoints: safety, OS, ORR (≥PR), DoR, TTP, QoL Continue treatment until PD or unacceptable toxicity Arm B: High dose DEX (n=153) Dexamethasone: 40 mg, D 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20 28-day cycles Arm A: POM – loDEX (n=302) Pomalidomide 4mg/day D1-21 Dexamethasone: 40 mg, D1, 8,15,22 28-day cycles Randomization (N=455) 2:1 Primary refractory or relapsed and refractory MM PD during treatment or within 60 days of last MM treatment (including ≥ cycles LEN or BTZ) Dimopoulos M, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract LBA-6. Patients were stratified by age (≤ 75 vs > 75 years), disease population (refractory vs refractory and relapsed vs refractory and intolerant [intolerant to BTZ only]), and number of prior therapies (2 vs > 2).
  • 26. Pomalidomide + Low Dose Dex vs. High Dose Dex • Patient population – Median number of prior therapies: 5 (range, 1-17) – Refractory to both LEN and BTZ: 72% • Treatment results Characteristic Arm A POM+loDEX Arm B High DEX Treatment duration (median), wks 12.4 8 Remain on study, % 45 25 Deceased, % 25 38 Dimopoulos M, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract LBA-6.
  • 27. Pomalidomide + Low Dose Dex vs. High Dose Dex • Efficacy Characteristic Arm A POM+loDEX Arm B High DEX Progression-free survival, wks 15.7 8* Overall survival, wks Not reached 34* *P<.001 Safety Characteristic, % Arm A POM+loDEX Arm B High DEX Neutropenia 42 15 Thrombocytopenia 21 24 Febrile neutropenia 7 0 Infection 24 23 1% of patients in each group developed neuropathy (Grade 3/4); 1% Arm A developed VTE. Dimopoulos M, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract LBA-6.
  • 28. Immunomodulatory Agents Immunomodulatory Tumor micro-environment CEREBLON BINDING ↓ IRF-4 Direct anti-tumor effects T cell co- stimulation Treg suppression Th1 cytokine NK and NKT cell activation ADCC Induce p21, p27, & p15 cell cycle arrest Alterations in (ERG)-1,2 3 and SPARC ↓ NFkB Inhibit caspase 3,8,9 Anti-angiogenesis Anti-inflammatory ↓ adhesion molecules Anti-osteoclastogenic
  • 29. Tai YT, et al. Cancer Res. 2005;65(13):5898-5906. Hideshima T, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(24 Pt 1):8530-8533. Catley L, et al. Blood. 2006;108(10):3441-3449. Blockade of Ubiquitinated Protein Catabolism with HDAC inhibitors HDAC6 HDAC6 HDAC6 Protein Protein aggregates (toxic) Ub 26S Proteasome Ub Ub Ub Aggresome Tubacin LBH, vorinostat Dynein Dynein Microtubule Autophagy Bortezomib Ub Ub Ub Lysosome Ub Ub Ub Ub UbUb Ub Ub Ub
  • 30. Vorinostat / Bortezomib VANTAGE 088, Phase III Bortezomib + Placebo Bortezomib + Vorinostat Multiple Myeloma 1-3 Prior Therapies N = 637 R Bortezomib + Vorinostat Bortezomib + Placebo P ORR 56% 41% < 0.0001 CBR 71% 54% < 0.0001 Median PFS 7.63 mo 6.83 mo < 0.01 Median OS NR 28.1 mo 0.35 Dimopoulos MA, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):811. ORR, overall response rate; CBR, clinical benefit rate; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival.
  • 31. PANORAMA 2 Study Design Phase II, Simon 2-stage study in BTZ-refractory MM a Response measured according to modified European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation 1998 criteria. CR, complete response; nCR, near CR; DOR, duration of response; OS, overall survival; PD, disease progression; PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; TTP, time to progression; TTR, time to response. • Adult pts • Relapsed and BTZ-refractory MM • ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy • Exposed to IMiDs Panobinostat BTZ Dexamethasone Panobinostat BTZ Dexamethasone Screening Treatment Phase 1 Eight 3-wk cycles Treatment Phase 2 6-wk cycles until PD After 8 cycles, continuation into treatment phase 2 in pts with clinical benefit Primary endpoint: overall response rate (CR + nCR + PR)a Key secondary endpoints: PFS, TTP, OS, MR, TTR, DOR Alsina et al. ASCO 2012. ABSTRACT 8012.
  • 32. Preliminary Response Data Activity in BTZ-refractory MM patients Best confirmed response (confirmed at 6 wks) N = 55 Overall response (CR + nCR + PR), n (%) 17 (31) Complete response – Near complete response 1 (2) Partial response 16 (29) Clinical benefit (CR + nCR + PR + MR), n (%)1-3 28 (51) Minimal response 11 (20) • VGPR observed in 3 pts • Responses were typically observed after 1 to 2 cycles • Stable disease observed in 3 pts, progressive disease in 18 pts; 3 pts not evaluable, 3 pts with unconfirmed response 1. Anderson KC, et al. Leukemia. 2008;22:231-239. 2. Richardson PG, et al. Br J Haematol. 2009;144:895-903. 3. Niesvizky R, et al. Br J Haematol. 2009;143:46-53. Alsina et al. ASCO 2012. ABSTRACT 8012.
  • 33. Current Phase III PANORAMA I Placebo Bortezomib Dexamethasone Panobinostat Bortezomib Dexamethasone Relapsed or Refractory MM R National Institutes of Health. Available at: www.clinicaltrials.gov. Accessed March 2011. Clinical trial ID: NCT01023308 Trial has met accrual goals
  • 34. Perifosine / Bortezomib / Dex N = 73 CR 4% PR 13% MR 19% SD 41% Median PFS 6.4 months Median OS 25 months MM, multiple myeloma; CR, complete response; PR, partial response; MR, marginal response; SD, stable disease; PFS, progression-free survival; OS, overall survival; dex, dexamethasone. AKT Inhibitors Perifosine, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone Richardson PG, et al. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2011;118(21):815.  Common grade 1/2 AE • Nausea, diarrhea, fatigue and musculoskeletal pain, upper respiratory infection, anorexia, constipation  Grade 3/4 AE • Thrombocytopenia (23%), neutropenia (15%), anemia (14%), pneumonia (12%), musculoskeletal pain (11%), bleeding (10%)
  • 36. • CS1 is highly and uniformly expressed on MM cells – Restricted expression on NK cells – Little to no expression on normal tissues • In an MM xenograft mouse model lenalidomide enhanced the anti-tumor effect of elotuzumab Elotuzumab: Anti-CS1 Hsi ED, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(9):2775-2784. Tai YT, et al. Blood. 2008;112(4):1329-1337. van Rhee F, et al. Mol Cancer Ther. 2009;8(9):2616-2624. Lonial S, et al. Blood. 2009;114. Abstract 432. MM, multiple myeloma; NK, natural killer.
  • 37. Elotuzumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone in RR Lenalidomide-naïve MM RRMM Phase 2 (1 – 3 prior therapies) Elotuzumab (10 mg) Lenalidomide Dexamethasone Elotuzumab (20 mg) Lenalidomide Dexamethasone Elotuzumab:10 or 20 mg/kg IV, d1, 8, 15, 22 cycles 1-2; d1, 15 for subsequent cycles Lenalidomide: 25 mg, daily, days 1-21 Dexamethasone: 40 mg, weekly. Premedication Regimen: 30-60 minutes prior to each elotuzumab infusion Methylprednisolone 50 mg IV or dexamethasone 8 mg IV, diphenhydramine 25-50 mg PO or IV (or equivalent), ranitidine 50 mg IV (or equivalent), acetaminophen 650-1000 mg PO Richardson P, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 202. Moreau P, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30. Abstract 8020.
  • 38. Best Response (IMWG Criteria) Elotuzumab 10 mg/kg n = 36 Elotuzumab 20 mg/kg n = 37 Total N = 73 ORR (≥ PR)1 92% 76% 84% CR / stringent CR2 14% 11% 12% VGPR2 47% 35% 41% Median PFS1 26.9 mo 18.6 mo 25 mo CR, complete response; IMWG, International Myeloma Working Group; ORR, objective response rate; PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; VGPR, very good partial response; len / dex, lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Historical Controls N ORR to len / dex* CR to len / dex MM009, Weber et al.3 177 61% 14% MM010, Dimopoulos et al.4 106 60% 16% *High-dose dex. 1. Richardson P, et al. Blood. 2012;120. Abstract 202 (oral presentation). 2. Moreau P, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30 (15 suppl):8020. 3. Weber DM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2133-2142. 4. Dimopoulos M, et al. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2123-2132. Elotuzumab, Lenalidomide, Dex in RR Lenalidomide-naïve MM Confidential: For Internal Use Only
  • 39. Siltuximab + BTZ vs BTZ Alone in Relapsed/Refractory MM • Siltuximab: chimeric IgG1k anti–human IL-6 antibody – High affinity, half-life ≈ 3 wks – Tolerability: no DLT up to ≥ 15 mg/kg • Study design: phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled – Patients:1-3 previous lines of therapy; no previous BTZ – Treatment – BTZ 1.3 mg/m2, 8 x 42-day cycles on Days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32 followed by maintenance, 4 x 35-day cycles on Days 1, 8, 15, 22 – Placebo or siltuximab 6 mg/kg every 2 wks – Patients progressing had option to end BTZ and start DEX 40 mg on Days 1-4, 9- 12, 17-20 and maintenance therapy at 40 mg on Days 1-4 Orlowski R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8018.
  • 40. Siltuximab + BTZ Efficacy • Nonsignificant trend toward improved ORR with siltuximab • Nonsignificant, marginal effect on overall PFS • Regional differences in PFS noted – Significant increase in NA and WE (P = .01) vs no effect for rest of world – Patients outside of NA and WE less often pretreated, which was thought to obviate benefit of adding siltuximab • Siltuximab continues to be developed for frontline therapy Orlowski R, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8018.
  • 41. Daratumumab: Phase I/II Study in Relapsed/Refractory MM • Daratumumab: anti-CD38 antibody; kills MM cells via ADCC, CDC, and induction of apoptosis • Patients: relapsed/refractory MM (≥ 2 different therapies), not eligible for ASCT; 3 patients/dosing group • Efficacy based on serum and/or urine M-component analyses • At the highest dose (4 mg/kg), patients had a 49%, 55%, and 64% reduction in serum M-component and a 80%, 89%, and 97% reduction in plasma cells • Adverse events were manageable Plesner T, et al. ASCO 2012. Abstract 8019.
  • 42. Targeting Myeloma Cells in the Bone Marrow Microenvironment Bone marrow Targeting MM cell stromal cells Targeting bone marrow milieu Proteosome Inhibitors (CEP 18770, NPI 0052, MLN 2238) Other targets FGFR3 IGF-1 Hsp-90 DAC PI-3-Akt-Mtor, bcl-2 CDK IKK /p38MAPK Aurora kinases Met HGF Monoclonal antibodies( CD 138, CD40, CD56,1L-6, TRAIL-R)
  • 43. •Massively parallel sequencing of 38 tumor genomes and their comparison to matched normal DNAs. •Mutation of : •genes involved in protein translation (seen in nearly half of the patients), •genes involved in histone methylation, •genes involved in blood coagulation. •in 11 members of the NF-kB pathway •kinase BRAF in 4%of patients, 4 M A R C H 2 0 1 1 | VO L 4 7 1 | N AT U R E | 4 6 7
  • 45. Whole-genome sequencing of multiple myeloma from diagnosis to plasma cell leukemia reveals genomic initiating events, evolution, and clonal tides Egan et al Blood. 2012;120(5):1060-1066)
  • 46. Clonal competition with alternating dominance in multiple myeloma ( Keats et al. Blood. 2012;120(5):1067-1076)
  • 47. 47 The Goal: CureTumorVolume→ Time → Ineffective treatment High-Dose Therapy Alkylators Dexamethasone Goal of newer therapy options Limit of detection

Notas do Editor

  1. Trends in Overall Survival of MMKumar et al studied survival in 387 patients who were treated at the Mayo Clinic from 1971–2006 and experienced a first relapse after ASCTPatients were divided into 2 cohorts, those with a relapse date on or before December 31, 2000 and those with a later relapse date Median overall survival (OS) was longer for patients who relapsed after 2000 compared with those who relapsed prior to this date (23.9 vs 11.8 months)Improved outcome of patients with MM has been observed in recent years, both in the relapsed setting as well as at diagnosisReferenceKumar SK, Rajkumar SV, Dispenzieri A, et al. Improved survival in multiple myeloma and theimpact of novel therapies. Blood. 2008;111(5):2516-2520.
  2. Orlowski RZ, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(22):4420-7. O&apos;Connor OA, et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15(22):7085-91.
  3. Cycle1 Day1–2 doses were 20 mg/m2, followed by escalation to 56mg/m2Patients who did not achieve a partial response (PR) after two cycles of CFZ or initially responded to single agent CFZ, but later showed evidence of progression of disease (POD) had dexamethasone (40mg/week) added to their regimenMedian progression free survival was 4.6 monthsMedian overall survival has not been reached with a median follow-up among survivors of 9.6 months (range: 0.3-14.3 months)The average time to best response was two cyclesThree out of the 11 patients that had dexamethasone 40mg/week added to their regimen obtained an improved responseTwelve patients (35%) were dose reducedTreatment emergent, non-hematologic Grade 3/4 adverse events for which contribution of CFZ cannot be excluded were: HTN (n = 7), lung infection (n = 6), pulmonary edema (n = 3), reduced ejection fraction (n=1), sepsis (n=2), febrile neutropenia (n=1), bacteremia (n = 1), protothecosis (n = 1), fatigue (n=1), neuropathy (n=1), microangiopathic hemolytic anemia(n=1), nausea/vomiting/+/- diarrhea (n = 2), gastrointestinal bleed in the setting of Grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n = 1), hyperkalemia (n = 1)
  4. A total of 22 patients were treated; the median age was 59.5 years (range 41−72); 17 were men and 7 were African American. The median number of prior chemotherapies was 4 lines (range 1−9), and median number of transplants was 2 (range 0−4); 96% of patients received prior bortezomib. As of May 2012, patients had received a median of 4 cycles (range 1−6), with no dose reductions reported. Thirty-minute infusion of carfilzomib at 45 mg/m2 or 56 mg/m2 in combination with dexamethasone was well tolerated. The most common AEs, irrespective of relationship to carfilzomib, were fatigue (36.4%), headache (36.4%), thrombocytopenia (36.4%), anemia (31.8%), cough (31.8%), dyspnea (31.8%), insomnia (27.3%), upper respiratory tract infection (27.3%), nausea (22.7%), and hypertension (18.2%). Non-hematologic AEs were mostly Grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 or higher AEs reported in &gt;10% of patients were anemia (27.3%) and thrombocytopenia (27.3%). SAEs were reported in 4 (18.2%) patients, and there were no deaths on study. Seven patients discontinued therapy due to PD (n=6, all on 45 mg/m2) or SAE (n=1, on 56 mg/m2for Grade 4 increased aspartate aminotransferase). Preliminary responses in patients who completed at least 2 cycles (n=20) included VGPR (n=2) and PR (n=9), for an ORR of 55% with SD in 6 patients and PD in 3. The remaining 2 patients discontinued prior to cycle 2 (unrelated AE=1, patient decision=1).
  5. Get Persmission clinical care optionsBTZ, bortezomib; DEX, dexamethasone; DLT, dose-limiting toxicity; IL, interleukin; MM, multiple myeloma.
  6. Get Persmission clinical care optionsBTZ, bortezomib; ORR, overall response rate; NA, North America; PFS, progression-free survival; TTP, time to progression; WE, Western Europe.
  7. Get Persmission clinical care optionsADCC, antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity; ASCT, autologous stem cell transplantation; CDC, complement-dependent cytotoxicity; MM, multiple myeloma.