Continuous therapy improves multiple myeloma outcomes

By Shreeya Nanda, Senior medwireNews Reporter

Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma receive significant progression-free and overall survival (PFS, OS) benefits from continuous treatment compared with fixed-duration therapy, suggests a pooled analysis.

The researchers evaluated both PFS1 and PFS2 – defined as the time to first progression or death and time to second progression or death, respectively – and found that continuous therapy significantly extended both endpoints.

“Our findings suggest that most of the PFS1 advantage associated with [continuous therapy] up front is maintained after first relapse and that [continuous therapy] does not induce a significant chemotherapy resistance”, they say.

This pooled analysis included individual patient data from three phase III trials in which multiple myeloma patients were randomly assigned to receive continuous or fixed-duration therapy with first-line novel agents – thalidomide, lenalidomide or bortezomib. The fixed-duration and continuous therapy protocols both involved upfront induction or consolidation therapy for an average of 1 year, but continuous therapy additionally included a minimum 2 years of maintenance.

Among the 827 participants alive and progression free a year after treatment assignment, considered the intent-to-treat population, median PFS1 was 32 months for the 417 patients who received continuous therapy. This was significantly longer than the 16 months for the 410 participants given fixed-duration therapy, equating to a hazard ratio (HR) for first progression or death of 0.47.

PFS2 was similarly significantly longer in the continuous than in the fixed-duration group, at a median of 55 versus 40 months, with a HR for second progression or death of 0.61.

Moreover, patients given continuous therapy had a significantly lower risk of death than those treated with the fixed-duration protocol, with 4-year OS rates of 69% versus 60% and a HR of 0.69.

Researcher Antonio Palumbo (University of Torino, Italy) and team report that after the induction or consolidation phase, 12% of patients in the continuous therapy group and 2% of those given fixed-duration therapy discontinued treatment as a result of adverse events. But “[t]his difference did not negatively affect efficacy, confirming the overall benefit of [continuous therapy]”, they write.

Approximately 90% of patients in either group who experienced relapse received second-line treatment, say the study authors, which suggests that continuous therapy does not “induce significant long-term toxicity” that precludes patients from receiving treatment after relapse.

They conclude in the Journal of Clinical Oncology: “Future studies evaluating other new, effective antimyeloma agents with… different mechanisms of action (such as new-generation proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents or monoclonal antibodies) will shed further light on the role of [continuous therapy].”

Licensed from medwireNews with permission from Springer Healthcare Ltd. ©Springer Healthcare Ltd. All rights reserved. Neither of these parties endorse or recommend any commercial products, services, or equipment.


The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
You might also like...
Study shows vaccinated multiple myeloma patients at greater risk of breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections