-
Blood Cancer Journal Mar 2022Extramedullary involvement (or extramedullary disease, EMD) represents an aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM), characterized by the ability of a clone and/or... (Review)
Review
Extramedullary involvement (or extramedullary disease, EMD) represents an aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM), characterized by the ability of a clone and/or subclone to thrive and grow independent of the bone marrow microenvironment. Several different definitions of EMD have been used in the published literature. We advocate that true EMD is restricted to soft-tissue plasmacytomas that arise due to hematogenous spread and have no contact with bony structures. Typical sites of EMD vary according to the phase of MM. At diagnosis, EMD is typically found in skin and soft tissues; at relapse, typical sites involved include liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, central nervous system (CNS), breast, pleura, and pericardium. The reported incidence of EMD varies considerably, and differences in diagnostic approach between studies are likely to contribute to this variability. In patients with newly diagnosed MM, the reported incidence ranges from 0.5% to 4.8%, while in relapsed/refractory MM the reported incidence is 3.4 to 14%. Available data demonstrate that the prognosis is poor, and considerably worse than for MM without soft-tissue plasmacytomas. Among patients with plasmacytomas, those with EMD have poorer outcomes than those with paraskeletal involvement. CNS involvement is rare, but prognosis is even more dismal than for EMD in other locations, particularly if there is leptomeningeal involvement. Available data on treatment outcomes for EMD are derived almost entirely from retrospective studies. Some agents and combinations have shown a degree of efficacy but, as would be expected, this is less than in MM patients with no extramedullary involvement. The paucity of prospective studies makes it difficult to justify strong recommendations for any treatment approach. Prospective data from patients with clearly defined EMD are important for the optimal evaluation of treatment outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Plasmacytoma; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Tumor Microenvironment
PubMed: 35314675
DOI: 10.1038/s41408-022-00643-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Multiple myeloma is a malignancy of plasma cells accounting for approximately 1% of cancers and 12% of haematological malignancies. The first-in-class proteasome... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple myeloma is a malignancy of plasma cells accounting for approximately 1% of cancers and 12% of haematological malignancies. The first-in-class proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, is commonly used to treat newly diagnosed as well as relapsed/refractory myeloma, either as single agent or combined with other therapies.
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of bortezomib on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), adverse events (AEs) and treatment-related death (TRD).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE (till 27 January 2016) as well as conference proceedings and clinical trial registries for randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared i) bortezomib versus no bortezomib with the same background therapy in each arm; ii) bortezomib versus no bortezomib with different background therapy in each arm or compared to other agent(s) and iii) bortezomib dose comparisons and comparisons of different treatment administrations and schedules.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted outcomes data and assessed risk of bias. We extracted hazard ratios (HR) and their confidence intervals for OS and PFS and odds ratios (OR) for response rates, AEs and TRD. We contacted trial authors to provide summary statistics if missing. We estimated Logrank statistics which were not available. We extracted HRQoL data, where available.
MAIN RESULTS
We screened a total of 3667 records, identifying 16 relevant RCTs involving 5626 patients and included 12 trials in the meta-analyses. All trials were randomised and open-label studies. Two trials were published in abstract form and therefore we were unable to assess potential risk of bias in full.There is moderate-quality evidence that bortezomib prolongs OS (four studies, 1586 patients; Peto OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92) and PFS (five studies, 1855 patients; Peto OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.74) from analysing trials of bortezomib versus no bortezomib with the same background therapy in each arm.There is high-quality evidence that bortezomib prolongs OS (five studies, 2532 patients; Peto OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88) but low-quality evidence for PFS (four studies, 2489 patients; Peto OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.75) from analysing trials of bortezomib versus no bortezomib with different background therapy in each arm or compared to other agent(s).Four trials (N = 716) examined different doses, methods of administrations and treatment schedules and were reviewed qualitatively only.We identified four trials in the meta-analysis that measured time to progression (TTP) and were able to extract and analyse PFS data for three of the studies, while in the case of one study, we included TTP data as PFS data were not available. We therefore did not analyse TTP separately in this review.Patients treated with bortezomib have increased risk of thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, gastro-intestinal toxicities, peripheral neuropathy, infection and fatigue with the quality of evidence highly variable. There is high-quality evidence for increased risk of cardiac disorders from analysing trials of bortezomib versus no bortezomib with different background therapy in each arm or versus other agents. The risk of TRD in either comparison group analysed is uncertain due to the low quality of the evidence.Only four trials analysed HRQoL and the data could not be meta-analysed.Subgroup analyses by disease setting revealed improvements in all outcomes, whereas for therapy setting, an improved benefit for bortezomib was observed in all outcomes and subgroups except for OS following consolidation therapy.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis found that myeloma patients receiving bortezomib benefited in terms of OS, PFS and response rate compared to those who did not receive bortezomib. This benefit was observed in trials of bortezomib versus no bortezomib with the same background therapy and in trials of bortezomib versus no bortezomib with different background therapy in each arm or compared to other agent(s). Further evaluation of newer proteasome inhibitors is required to ascertain whether these agents offer an improved risk-benefit profile, while more studies of HRQoL are also required.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Bortezomib; Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27096326
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010816.pub2 -
Journal of Hematology & Oncology Dec 2020B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T-cell therapy is an emerging treatment option for multiple myeloma. The aim of this systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T-cell therapy is an emerging treatment option for multiple myeloma. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine its safety and clinical activity and to identify factors influencing these outcomes.
METHODS
We performed a database search using the terms "BCMA," "CAR," and "multiple myeloma" for clinical studies published between 01/01/2015 and 01/01/2020. The methodology is further detailed in PROSPERO (CRD42020125332).
RESULTS
Twenty-three different CAR-T-cell products have been used so far in 640 patients. Cytokine release syndrome was observed in 80.3% (69.0-88.2); 10.5% (6.8-16.0) had neurotoxicity. A higher neurotoxicity rate was reported in studies that included more heavily pretreated patients: 19.1% (13.3-26.7; I = 45%) versus 2.8% (1.3-6.1; I = 0%) (p < 0.0001). The pooled overall response rate was 80.5% (73.5-85.9); complete responses (CR) were observed in 44.8% (35.3-54.6). A pooled CR rate of 71.9% (62.8-79.6; I = 0%) was noted in studies using alpaca/llama-based constructs, whereas it was only 18.0% (6.5-41.1; I = 67%) in studies that used retroviral vectors for CAR transduction. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.2 (11.4-17.4) months, which compared favorably to the expected PFS of 1.9 (1.5-3.7) months (HR 0.14; p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS
Although considerable toxicity was observed, BCMA-targeted CAR-T-cell therapy is highly efficacious even in advanced multiple myeloma. Subgroup analysis confirmed the anticipated inter-study heterogeneity and identified potential factors contributing to safety and efficacy. The results of this meta-analysis may assist the future design of CAR-T-cell studies and lead to optimized BCMA CAR-T-cell products.
Topics: B-Cell Maturation Antigen; Cytokine Release Syndrome; Humans; Immunotherapy, Adoptive; Multiple Myeloma; Neurotoxicity Syndromes; Progression-Free Survival; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33272302
DOI: 10.1186/s13045-020-01001-1 -
International Journal of Medical... 2021Multiple myeloma (MM) is incurable in spite of recent treatment improvements, highlighting the development of new therapies. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Multiple myeloma (MM) is incurable in spite of recent treatment improvements, highlighting the development of new therapies. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has dramatically changed the therapeutic effectiveness in high-risk B-cell malignancies. For relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), preclinical evaluations of CAR-T therapy have shown promising efficacy, thus various active clinical trials are under way. Herein, we conducted this review to summarize efficacy and safety of CAR-T therapy and provide more evidence to guide clinical treatments. We systematically searched literature based on databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and conference abstracts reported from American Society of Hematology (ASH), European Hematology Association (EHA) and American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), in addition to other sources (www.clinicaltrials.gov, article citations). Data assessed efficacy and safety of CAR-T therapy in patients with RRMM were extracted and evaluated, and then systematically analyzed by Comprehensive Meta-analysis 3.0 (CMA 3.0). A total of 23 studies including 350 participants from different countries, diagnosed as RRMM and treated with CAR-T therapy (containing 7 antigens targeted by CARs) were combined. In summary, we discovered the pooled overall response rate (77%), complete response rate (37%) and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity rate within responders (78%). Furthermore, the pooled relapse rate of responders was 38% and median progression-free survival was 8 months. The pooled survival rate was 87% at last follow-up (median, 12 months). In addition, the pooled grade 3-4 rates of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurologic toxicities (NT) were 14% and 13%, respectively. Our study suggests that CAR-T therapy has demonstrated efficacy and safety in RRMM patients. BCMA-targeted CAR-T and anti-BCMA contained regimen have shown better efficacy.
Topics: B-Cell Maturation Antigen; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Immunotherapy, Adoptive; Multiple Myeloma; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Progression-Free Survival; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen
PubMed: 33746596
DOI: 10.7150/ijms.46811 -
Blood Advances Dec 2020The prognostic value of minimal residual disease (MRD) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated in a large cohort of patients with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The prognostic value of minimal residual disease (MRD) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated in a large cohort of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) using a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Medline and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published up to 8 June 2019, with no date limit on the indexed database. Clinical end points stratified by MRD status (positive or negative) were extracted, including hazard ratios (HRs) on PFS and OS, P values, and confidence intervals (CIs). HRs were estimated based on reconstructed patient-level data from published Kaplan-Meier curves. Forty-four eligible studies with PFS data from 8098 patients, and 23 studies with OS data from 4297 patients were identified to assess the association between MRD status and survival outcomes. Compared with MRD positivity, achieving MRD negativity improved PFS (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.29-0.37; P < .001) and OS (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.39-0.51; P < .001). MRD negativity was associated with significantly improved survival outcomes regardless of disease setting (newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory MM), MRD sensitivity thresholds, cytogenetic risk, method of MRD assessment, depth of clinical response at the time of MRD measurement, and MRD assessment premaintenance and 12 months after start of maintenance therapy. The strong prognostic value of MRD negativity and its association with favorable outcomes in various disease and treatment settings sets the stage to adopt MRD as a treatment end point, including development of therapeutic strategies. This large meta-analysis confirms the utility of MRD as a relevant surrogate for PFS and OS in MM.
Topics: Cytogenetics; Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Neoplasm, Residual; Prognosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33284948
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002827 -
Pharmacological Research Apr 2023Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR)-modified T lymphocytes represent one of the most innovative and promising approaches to treating hematologic malignancies. CAR-T cell... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR)-modified T lymphocytes represent one of the most innovative and promising approaches to treating hematologic malignancies. CAR-T cell therapy is currently being used for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell malignancies including Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, Large B-Cell Lymphoma, Follicular Lymphoma, Multiple Myeloma and Mantle Cell Lymphoma. Despite the unprecedented clinical success, one of the major issues of the approved CAR-T cell therapy - tisagenlecleucel, axicabtagene, lisocabtagene, idecabtagene, ciltacabtagene and brexucabtagene - is the uncertainty about its persistence which in turn could lead to weak or no response to therapy with malignancy recurrence. Here we show that the prognosis of patients who do not respond to CAR-T cell therapy is still an unmet medical need. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis collecting individual data on Duration of Response from at least 12-month follow-up studies. We found that the pooled prevalence of relapse within the first 12 months after CAR-T infusion was 61% (95% CI, 43%-78%); moreover, one year after the infusion, the analysis highlighted a pooled prevalence of relapse of 24% (95% CI, 11%-42%). Our results suggest that identifying potential predictive biomarkers of response to CAR-T therapy, especially for patients affected by the advanced stage of blood malignancies, could lead to stratification of the eligible population to that therapy, recognizing which patients will benefit and which will not, helping regulators to make decision in that way.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen; T-Lymphocytes; Hematologic Neoplasms; Chronic Disease; Multiple Myeloma; Recurrence; Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy
PubMed: 36963592
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2023.106742 -
Advances in Therapy May 2022Many treatment regimens have been evaluated in transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The objective of this study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Many treatment regimens have been evaluated in transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of relevant therapies for the treatment of TIE patients with NDMM.
METHODS
Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) from large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating different treatment options for TIE patients with NDMM were compared in a network meta-analysis (NMA). The NMA includes recent primary and long-term OS readouts from SWOG S0777, ENDURANCE, MAIA, and ALCYONE. Relevant trials were identified through a systematic literature review. Relative efficacy measures (i.e., hazard ratios [HRs] for PFS and OS) were extracted and synthesised in random-effects NMAs.
RESULTS
A total of 122 publications describing 45 unique RCTs was identified. Continuous lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) was selected as the referent comparator. Daratumumab-containing treatments (daratumumab/lenalidomide/dexamethasone [D-Rd], daratumumab/bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone [D-VMP]) and bortezomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (VRd) had the highest probabilities of being more effective than Rd continuous for PFS (HR: D-Rd, 0.53; D-VMP, 0.57, VRd, 0.77) and OS (HR: D-Rd, 0.68; VRd, 0.77, D-VMP, 0.78). D-Rd had the highest chance of being ranked as the most effective treatment with respect to PFS and OS. Results using a smaller network focusing on only those regimens that are relevant in Europe were consistent with the primary analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
These comparative effectiveness data may help inform treatment selection in TIE patients with NDMM.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bortezomib; Dexamethasone; Humans; Lenalidomide; Multiple Myeloma; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35246820
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-022-02083-8 -
Blood Advances Oct 2023Bispecific antibodies, a novel immunotherapy with promising efficacy against multiple myeloma, form immune synapses between T-cell surface marker CD3 and malignant cell... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Bispecific antibodies, a novel immunotherapy with promising efficacy against multiple myeloma, form immune synapses between T-cell surface marker CD3 and malignant cell markers, including B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA), FcRH5, and G protein-coupled receptor GPRC5D. These bispecific antibodies so effectively deplete plasma cells (and to some extent T-cells) that patients are at increased risk of developing infections. A systematic review and meta-analysis of infections in published studies of patients with myeloma treated with bispecific antibodies was conducted to better characterize the infection risks. A literature search used MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane to identify relevant studies between inception and February 10, 2023, including major conference presentations. Phase 1b-3 clinical trials and observational studies were included. Sixteen clinical trials comprising 1666 patients were included. Median follow-up was 7.6 months and 38% of the cohort had penta-drug refractory disease. Pooled prevalence of all-grade infections was 56%, whereas the prevalence of grade ≥3 infections was 24%. Patients who were treated with BCMA-targeted bispecifics had significantly higher rates of grade ≥3 infections than non-BCMA bispecifics (25% vs 20%). Similarly, patients treated with bispecifics in combination with other agents had significantly higher rate of all-grade infection than those receiving monotherapy (71% vs 52%). In observational studies (n = 293), excluded from the primary analysis to ensure no overlap with patients in clinical trials, several infections classically associated with T-cell depletion were identified. This systematic review identifies BCMA-targeted bispecifics and bispecific combination therapy as having higher infection risk, requiring vigilant infection screening and prophylaxis strategies.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Antibodies, Bispecific; B-Cell Maturation Antigen; Immunotherapy; T-Lymphocytes; CD3 Complex
PubMed: 37467036
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023010539 -
Blood Cancer Journal Sep 2023Rituximab-based chemo-immunotherapy is currently the standard first-line treatment for Waldenstrom macroglobulinaemia (WM), while ibrutinib has emerged as an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Rituximab-based chemo-immunotherapy is currently the standard first-line treatment for Waldenstrom macroglobulinaemia (WM), while ibrutinib has emerged as an alternative. In the absence of randomised trials (RCTs) comparing these regimens, the optimal first-line treatment for WM remains uncertain. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we sought to assess the efficacy and safety of first-line treatment regimens for WM. We searched key databases from January 2007 to March 2023, including phase II and III trials, including treatment-naïve WM patients treated with rituximab-based regimens or ibrutinib. Response rates, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicities were evaluated. Four phase III and seven phase II trials were included among 736 unique records. Pooled response rates from all comparative and non-comparative trials were 46%, 33% and 26% for bendamustine rituximab (BR), bortezomib-dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, rituximab (BDRC) and ibrutinib rituximab (IR), respectively. Two-year pooled PFS was 89%, 81% and 82% with BR, BDRC and IR, respectively. Neuropathy was more frequent with bortezomib, while haematologic and cardiac toxicities were more common with chemo-immunotherapy and ibrutinib-based regimens respectively. Our findings suggest that BR yields higher response rates than bortezomib or ibrutinib-based combinations. RCTs comparing BR against emerging therapies, including novel Bruton Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors, are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia; Rituximab; Bortezomib; Clinical Protocols; Cyclophosphamide
PubMed: 37679351
DOI: 10.1038/s41408-023-00916-5 -
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases Jul 2022Amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is an ultra-rare disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Few studies have examined the global epidemiology of...
BACKGROUND
Amyloid light-chain (AL) amyloidosis is an ultra-rare disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Few studies have examined the global epidemiology of this condition.
METHODS
This study estimated the diagnosed incidence and 1-year, 5-year, 10-year, and 20-year period prevalence of AL amyloidosis in 2018 for countries in and near Europe, and in the United States (US), Canada, Brazil, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Russia. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify country-specific, age- and gender-specific diagnosed incidence of AL amyloidosis and observed survival data-point inputs for an incidence-to-prevalence model. Extrapolations were used to estimate incidence and prevalence for countries without registry or published epidemiological data.
RESULTS
Of 171 publications identified in the SLR, 10 records met the criteria for data extraction, and two records were included in the final incidence-to-prevalence model. In 2018, an estimated 74,000 AL amyloidosis cases worldwide were diagnosed during the preceding 20 years. The estimated incidence and 20-year prevalence rates were 10 and 51 cases per million population, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Orphan medicinal product designation criteria of the European Medicines Agency or Electronic Code of Federal Regulations indicate that a disease must not affect > 5 in 10,000 people across the European Union or affect < 200,000 people in the US. This study provides up-to-date epidemiological patterns of AL amyloidosis, which is vital for understanding the burden of the disease, increasing awareness, and to further research and treatment options.
Topics: Europe; Humans; Immunoglobulin Light-chain Amyloidosis; Incidence; Prevalence; Registries; United States
PubMed: 35854312
DOI: 10.1186/s13023-022-02414-6