Bacteremia, or bloodstream infection (BSI), is a leading cause of death among patients with certain types of cancer. A previous study reported that intestinal domination, defined as occupation of at ...least 30 % of the microbiota by a single bacterial taxon, is associated with BSI in patients undergoing allo-HSCT. However, the impact of the intestinal microbiome before treatment initiation on the risk of subsequent BSI remains unclear. Our objective was to characterize the fecal microbiome collected before treatment to identify microbes that predict the risk of BSI.
We sampled 28 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) prior to administration of chemotherapy and characterized 16S ribosomal RNA genes using high-throughput DNA sequencing. We quantified bacterial taxa and used techniques from machine learning to identify microbial biomarkers that predicted subsequent BSI.
We found that patients who developed subsequent BSI exhibited decreased overall diversity and decreased abundance of taxa including Barnesiellaceae, Coriobacteriaceae, Faecalibacterium, Christensenella, Dehalobacterium, Desulfovibrio, and Sutterella. Using machine-learning methods, we developed a BSI risk index capable of predicting BSI incidence with a sensitivity of 90 % at a specificity of 90 % based only on the pretreatment fecal microbiome.
These results suggest that the gut microbiota can identify high-risk patients before HSCT and that manipulation of the gut microbiota for prevention of BSI in high-risk patients may be a useful direction for future research. This approach may inspire the development of similar microbiome-based diagnostic and prognostic models in other diseases.
To provide an update on recent advances in the management of patients with multiple myeloma who are not eligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation.
A comprehensive review of the literature on ...diagnostic criteria is provided, and treatment options and management of adverse events are summarized.
Patients with symptomatic disease and organ damage (ie, hypercalcemia, renal failure, anemia, or bone lesions) require immediate treatment. The International Staging System and chromosomal abnormalities identify high- and standard-risk patients. Proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, corticosteroids, and alkylating agents are the most active agents. The presence of concomitant diseases, frailty, or disability should be assessed and, if present, treated with reduced-dose approaches. Bone disease, renal damage, hematologic toxicities, infections, thromboembolism, and peripheral neuropathy are the most frequent disabling events requiring prompt and active supportive care.
These recommendations will help clinicians ensure the most appropriate care for patients with myeloma in everyday clinical practice.
Timing the initiation of multiple myeloma Rustad, Even H; Yellapantula, Venkata; Leongamornlert, Daniel ...
Nature communications,
04/2020, Letnik:
11, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
The evolution and progression of multiple myeloma and its precursors over time is poorly understood. Here, we investigate the landscape and timing of mutational processes shaping multiple myeloma ...evolution in a large cohort of 89 whole genomes and 973 exomes. We identify eight processes, including a mutational signature caused by exposure to melphalan. Reconstructing the chronological activity of each mutational signature, we estimate that the initial transformation of a germinal center B-cell usually occurred during the first 2
-3
decades of life. We define four main patterns of activation-induced deaminase (AID) and apolipoprotein B mRNA editing catalytic polypeptide-like (APOBEC) mutagenesis over time, including a subset of patients with evidence of prolonged AID activity during the pre-malignant phase, indicating antigen-responsiveness and germinal center reentry. Our findings provide a framework to study the etiology of multiple myeloma and explore strategies for prevention and early detection.
This phase I study evaluated elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM).
Three cohorts were enrolled and treated with elotuzumab (5.0, ...10, or 20 mg/kg intravenously) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle in the first two cycles, and days 1 and 15 of each subsequent cycle; lenalidomide 25 mg orally PO on days 1 to 21; and dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were assessed during cycle 1 of each cohort, and clinical responses were evaluated during each cycle. The first five patients received up to six cycles of therapy; subsequent patients were treated until disease progression.
Twenty-nine patients with advanced MM and a median of three prior MM therapies were enrolled; 28 patients were treated, three each in the 5.0-mg/kg and 10-mg/kg cohorts and 22 in the 20-mg/kg cohort. No DLTs were observed up to the maximum proposed dose of 20 mg/kg. The most frequent grade 3 to 4 toxicities were neutropenia (36%) and thrombocytopenia (21%). Two patients experienced a serious infusion reaction (one grade 4 anaphylactic reaction and one grade 3 stridor) during the first treatment cycle. Objective responses were obtained in 82% (23 of 28) of treated patients. After a median of 16.4 months follow-up, the median time to progression was not reached for patients in the 20-mg/kg cohort who were treated until disease progression.
The combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and low-dose dexamethasone was generally well tolerated and showed encouraging response rates in patients with relapsed or refractory MM.
Summary Background Intravenous injection is the standard administration route of bortezomib; however, subcutaneous administration is an important alternative. We compared the efficacy and safety of ...subcutaneous versus intravenous bortezomib at the approved 1·3 mg/m2 dose and twice per week schedule in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Methods This randomised, phase 3 study was undertaken at 53 centres in ten countries in Europe, Asia, and South America. Patients aged 18 years and older with relapsed multiple myeloma after one to three previous lines of therapy were randomly assigned to receive up to eight 21-day cycles of bortezomib 1·3 mg/m2 , on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, by subcutaneous injection or intravenous infusion. Randomisation was by an interactive voice response system based on a computer-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by number of previous lines and disease stage. Patients and treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary objective was to show non-inferiority of subcutaneous versus intravenous bortezomib in terms of overall response rate (ORR) after four cycles in all patients with a diagnosis of measurable, secretory multiple myeloma who received one or more dose of drug (response-evaluable population). Non-inferiority was defined as retaining 60% of the intravenous treatment effect. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00722566 , and is ongoing for long-term follow-up. Findings 222 patients were randomly assigned to receive subcutaneous (n=148) or intravenous (n=74) bortezomib. The response-evaluable population consisted of 145 patients in the subcutaneous group and 73 in the intravenous group. Patients received a median of eight cycles (range one to ten) in both groups. ORR after four cycles was 42% in both groups (61 patients in subcutaneous group and 31 in intravenous group; ORR difference −0·4%, 95% CI −14·3 to 13·5), showing non-inferiority (p=0·002). After a median follow-up of 11·8 months (IQR 7·9–16·8) in the subcutaneous group and 12·0 months (8·1–15·6) in the intravenous group, there were no significant differences in time to progression (median 10·4 months, 95% CI 8·5–11·7, vs 9·4 months, 7·6–10·6; p=0·387) and 1-year overall survival (72·6%, 95% CI 63·1–80·0, vs 76·7%, 64·1–85·4; p=0·504) with subcutaneous versus intravenous bortezomib. Grade 3 or worse adverse events were reported in 84 (57%) patients in the subcutaneous group versus 52 (70%) in the intravenous group; the most common were thrombocytopenia (19 13% vs 14 19%), neutropenia (26 18% vs 13 18%), and anaemia (18 12% vs six 8%). Peripheral neuropathy of any grade (56 38% vs 39 53%; p=0·044), grade 2 or worse (35 24% vs 30 41%; p=0·012), and grade 3 or worse (nine 6% vs 12 16%; p=0·026) was significantly less common with subcutaneous than with intravenous administration. Subcutaneous administration was locally well tolerated. Interpretation Subcutaneous bortezomib offers non-inferior efficacy to standard intravenous administration, with an improved safety profile. Funding Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, and Millennium Pharmaceuticals.
Patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have poor prognosis. The STRATUS study assessed safety and efficacy of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in the largest cohort ...to date of patients with RRMM. Patients who failed treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide and had adequate prior alkylator therapy were eligible. Pomalidomide 4 mg was given on days 1-21 of 28-day cycles with low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged >75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Safety was the primary end point; secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Among 682 patients enrolled, median age was 66 years, and median time since diagnosis was 5.3 years. Median number of prior regimens was 5. Most patients were refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib (80.2%). Median follow-up was 16.8 months; median duration of treatment was 4.9 months. Most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia 49.7%, anemia 33.0%, and thrombocytopenia 24.1%). Most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were pneumonia (10.9%) and fatigue (5.9%). Grade 3/4 venous thromboembolism and peripheral neuropathy were rare (1.6% each). The ORR was 32.6%, and the median DOR was 7.4 months. Median PFS and OS were 4.6 months and 11.9 months, respectively. We present the largest trial to date evaluating pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with RRMM, further confirming that this regimen offers clinically meaningful benefit and is generally well tolerated. www.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01712789.
•STRATUS (MM-010), the largest POM + LoDEX trial, confirms the regimen offers clinically meaningful benefit and is generally well tolerated.•STRATUS supports POM + LoDEX as a standard of care for patients with RRMM who have poor prognosis and high need for effective treatments.
To characterize efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based versus nonbortezomib-based induction regimens through an integrated analysis of data from phase III studies in transplantation-eligible ...patients with previously untreated myeloma.
Patient-level data from the IFM 2005-01 (bortezomib-dexamethasone v vincristine-doxorubicin-dexamethasone VAD induction), HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 (bortezomib-doxorubicin-dexamethasone v VAD), and PETHEMA GEM05MENOS65 (bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone v thalidomide-dexamethasone) studies were pooled in an integrated analysis of efficacy and safety. Study-level data from the GIMEMA MM-BO2005 study (bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone v thalidomide-dexamethasone) supplemented the integrated patient-level analysis. Key efficacy end points were post-transplantation complete plus near-complete response (CR+nCR) rate and progression-free survival (PFS).
Patient-level data for 1,572 patients (bortezomib-based induction, n = 787; nonbortezomib-based induction, n = 785) were included. Post-transplantation CR+nCR rate was significantly higher following bortezomib-based versus nonbortezomib-based induction (38% v 24%; odds ratio, 2.05; P < .001); the benefit remained similar (pooled odds ratio, 1.96) when GIMEMA MM-BO2005 data were included. Median PFS was 35.9 months versus 28.6 months with bortezomib-based versus nonbortezomib-based induction, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.75; P < .001); 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were 79.7% and 74.7%, respectively (hazard ratio for OS, 0.81; P = .0402). Median duration of induction treatment was 11 weeks in both treatment groups. Rates of peripheral neuropathy during induction were 34% versus 17% (grade ≥ 3, 6% v 1%). Overall, 3% and 4% of patients died during bortezomib-based and nonbortezomib-based induction, respectively.
Bortezomib-based induction results in significant improvements in response and PFS/OS compared with nonbortezomib-based induction and is generally well tolerated, with a higher rate of peripheral neuropathy but no apparent increase in risk of death during induction.
The presence of certain high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, such as translocations (4;14) and (14;16) and deletion (17p), are known to have a negative impact on survival in multiple myeloma (MM). ...The phase 3 study ASPIRE (N = 792) demonstrated that progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly improved with carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (KRd), compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed MM. This preplanned subgroup analysis of ASPIRE was conducted to evaluate KRd vs Rd by baseline cytogenetics according to fluorescence in situ hybridization. Of 417 patients with known cytogenetic risk status, 100 patients (24%) were categorized with high-risk cytogenetics (KRd, n = 48; Rd, n = 52) and 317 (76%) were categorized with standard-risk cytogenetics (KRd, n = 147; Rd, n = 170). For patients with high-risk cytogenetics, treatment with KRd resulted in a median PFS of 23.1 months, a 9-month improvement relative to treatment with Rd. For patients with standard-risk cytogenetics, treatment with KRd led to a 10-month improvement in median PFS vs Rd. The overall response rates for KRd vs Rd were 79.2% vs 59.6% (high-risk cytogenetics) and 91.2% vs 73.5% (standard-risk cytogenetics); approximately fivefold as many patients with high- or standard-risk cytogenetics achieved a complete response or better with KRd vs Rd (29.2% vs 5.8% and 38.1% vs 6.5%, respectively). KRd improved but did not abrogate the poor prognosis associated with high-risk cytogenetics. This regimen had a favorable benefit-risk profile in patients with relapsed MM, irrespective of cytogenetic risk status, and should be considered a standard of care in these patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01080391.
•KRd has a favorable benefit-risk profile compared with Rd, regardless of baseline cytogenetic risk status, in patients with relapsed MM.•KRd improves but does not abrogate the poor prognosis associated with high-risk cytogenetics in patients with relapsed MM.
Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting antigens expressed by plasma cells demonstrated major clinical activity in multiple myeloma patients and therefore became a new major class of drug for these ...patients. Elotuzumab is a humanized mAb targeting the cell surface signaling lymphocytic activation molecule family member 7, a glycoprotein highly expressed on plasma cells, that is the second mAb approved for the treatment of myeloma patients. The mechanism of action of elotuzumab includes natural killer cell (NK) mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity and direct activation of NK-cells. Elotuzumab has been approved in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Elo-Rd) and pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Elo-Pd) for the treatment of relapsed myeloma patients. The present review will focus on elotuzumab, providing a summary of the mechanism of action, efficacy and safety and taking into consideration patients' selection.
The prognosis of multiple myeloma is mainly dependent upon chromosomal changes. The 2 major abnormalities driving poor outcome are del(17p) and t(4;14). However, the outcome of these high-risk ...patients is not absolutely uniform, with some patients presenting long survival. We hypothesized that these better outcomes might be related to concomitant “good-risk” chromosomal changes exploring hyperdiploidy. We analyzed a large series of 965 myeloma patients, including 168 patients with t(4;14) and 126 patients with del(17p), using high-throughput single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays after plasma cell sorting. As expected, trisomic chromosomes were highly associated. Using the LASSO model, we found that only chromosome 3, when trisomic, was associated with a longer progression-free survival and that 3 trisomies modulated overall survival (OS) in myeloma patients: trisomies 3 and 5 significantly improved OS, whereas trisomy 21 worsened OS. In patients with t(4;14), trisomies 3 and/or 5 seemed to overcome the poor prognosis. For the first time, using a specific modeling approach, we show that not all trisomies display the same prognostic impact. This finding could be important for routine assessment of prognosis in myeloma, and some high-risk patients with a traditional evaluation could in fact be standard-risk patients.
•In myeloma patients, trisomy 3 improved time to progression and trisomies 3 and/or 5 improved overall survival.•In contrast, trisomy 21 significantly worsened overall survival.
PDF
