The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide versus melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide in untreated multiple myeloma.

På svenska

Author

  • Sonja Zweegman
  • Bronno van der Holt
  • Ulf-Henrik Mellqvist
  • Morten Salomo
  • Gerard M J Bos
  • Mark-David Levin
  • Heleen Visser-Wisselaar
  • Markus Hansson
  • Annette W G van der Velden
  • Wendy Deenik
  • Astrid Gruber
  • Juleon L L M Coenen
  • Torben Plesner
  • Saskia K Klein
  • Bea C Tanis
  • Damian L Szatkowski
  • Rolf E Brouwer
  • Matthijs Westerman
  • M Rineke B L Leys
  • Harm A M Sinnige
  • Einar Haukås
  • Klaas G van der Hem
  • Marc F Durian
  • E Vera J M Mattijssen
  • Niels W C J van de Donk
  • Marian J P L Stevens-Kroef
  • Pieter Sonneveld
  • Anders Waage
Show all

Summary, in English

The combination of melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are ineligible for stem-cell transplantation. Long term treatment with thalidomide is hampered by neurotoxicity. Melphalan, prednisone and lenalidomide, followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy showed promising results, without severe neuropathy emerging. We randomly assigned 668 NDMM patients, ineligible for stem-cell transplantation, between nine 4-weekly cycles of MPT followed by thalidomide maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (MPT-T) and the same MP regimen with thalidomide being replaced by lenalidomide (MPR-R). This multicenter, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was undertaken by HOVON and the NMSG. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The accrual for the study was completed in October 19, 2012. 318 patients were randomly assigned to receive MPT-T and 319 MPR-R. After a median follow up of 36 months PFS with MPT-T was 20 months (95% CI 18-23 months) versus 23 months (95% CI 19-27 months) with MPR-R (HR 0.87 [0.72-1.04], p=0.12). Response rates were similar, with ≥VGPR 47% and 45% respectively. Hematological toxicity was more pronounced with MPR-R, especially grade 3 and 4 neutropenia: 64 versus 27%. Neuropathy ≥ grade 3 was significantly higher in the MPT-T arm; 16% versus 2% in MPR-R, resulting in a significant shorter duration of maintenance therapy (5 versus 17 months in MPR-R), irrespective of age. MPR-R has no advantage over MPT-T concerning efficacy. The toxicity profile differed with clinically significant neuropathy during thalidomide maintenance versus myelosuppression with MPR.

Department/s

Publishing year

2016

Language

English

Pages

1109-1116

Publication/Series

Blood

Volume

127

Issue

9

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

American Society of Hematology

Topic

  • Hematology

Status

Published

Research group

  • Myeloma research group

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1528-0020