Neuropathy and efficacy of once weekly subcutaneous bortezomib in multiple myeloma and light chain (AL) amyloidosis

Once-weekly versus twice-weekly bortezomib in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a real-world analysis

Induction regimens for multiple myeloma (MM) commonly include bortezomib, which has typically been administered twice weekly despite studies demonstrating comparable efficacy and less peripheral neuropathy (PN) with once-weekly bortezomib. We aimed to analyze the real-world prevalence and efficacy of once-weekly versus twice-weekly bortezomib regimens in newly diagnosed MM. We analyzed 2497 US patients aged 18-70 years treated with commercial first-line bortezomib using nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived data, including 910 (36.4%) patients who received twice-weekly and 1522 (63.2%) who received once-weekly bortezomib. Once-weekly bortezomib use increased over time, from 57.7% in 2017 to 73.1% in 2022. Multivariate analysis identified worsened performance status and more recent year of diagnosis with higher odds of receiving once-weekly bortezomib. Real-world progression-free survival (median 37.2 months with once-weekly versus 39.6 months with twice-weekly, p = 0.906) and overall survival (medians not reached in either cohort, p = 0.800) were comparable. PN rates were higher in patients receiving twice-weekly bortezomib (34.7% versus 18.5%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, once-weekly bortezomib is clearly associated with similar efficacy and fewer toxicities compared to twice-weekly bortezomib. Our findings support once-weekly bortezomib as a standard-of-care regimen for newly diagnosed patients with MM.

Opportunity Strikes for Reducing Cancer Drug Waste: Bortezomib as an Example of Vial Mis-Sizing in Oncology

Mis-sized packaging leads to millions of dollars in drug waste annually. Now is the time to act.

Investigation of the frequency of bortezomib neuropathy in patients with multiple myeloma diagnosis with normal and abnormal genetic characteristics

INTRODUCTION

Bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with multiple myeloma is an undesirable and sometimes severe side effect. Our study aimed to examine whether there was a difference in bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy between multiple myeloma patients with normal and abnormal genetic characteristics.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis is based on the assessment of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy frequency in newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma patients with normal (n = 68) and abnormal (n = 45) genetic profiles. A total of 113 patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma according to the International Myeloma Working Group criteria, between 2016 and 2021, were included in this study.

RESULTS

Neuropathy was detected in 42 (37.1%) patients. The most common genetic anomalies were 13q del (in 28.9%), t(4.14) (in 22.2%), and trisomy 7 (in 20.0%). When patients with and without bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy were compared, the only significant differences were observed for age (p = 0.032) and genetic grouping (p = 0.001); whereas other characteristics that could be associated with bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy were similarly distributed in both groups. Bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy was significantly more frequent in multiple myeloma patients with normal genetic characteristics (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

As a result of our study, it was observed that the frequency of bortezomib neuropathy was significantly higher in patients with normal genetic features compared to those with abnormal genetic features. This result suggested that factors other than genetic factors should be investigated to clarify the etiology of bortezomib-associated neuropathy in patients with multiple myeloma.

Diagnostic and Treatment Strategies for AL Amyloidosis in an Era of Therapeutic Innovation

Despite significant progress and improving outcomes in the management of plasma cell disorders, AL amyloidosis remains diagnostically and therapeutically challenging for clinicians across practice settings. There is, however, a reason for optimism with the advent of new combination therapy approaches and novel targets offering the promise of improvement in end organ function, survival, and quality of life. This review offers a clinically applicable overview of an approach to diagnosis, risk stratification, and clinical management of AL amyloidosis in an era of rapid therapeutic innovation.

Treatment of relapsed and refractory Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia

Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare type of indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) that remains incurable. Several effective agents such as monoclonal antibodies (in combination with chemotherapy), Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors, proteasome inhibitors, and BCL2 inhibitors are (becoming) available for the treatment of relapsed and refractory WM. There is however no consensus on a preferred treatment in the relapsed setting. Choice of therapy in relapsed WM should be individualized by taking several treatment and patients characteristics into account, such as treatment duration, toxicity, age, comorbidities and MYD88^L265P and CXCR4 mutational status. Due to better understanding of WM biology and the arrival of novel anti-lymphoma agents, the therapeutic options are increasing. Non-cytotoxic and fixed duration regimens, such as those explored in other indolent NHLs should be the focus of future clinical trials in WM.

A randomized phase 3 study of ixazomib-dexamethasone versus physician's choice in relapsed or refractory AL amyloidosis

In the first phase 3 study in relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis (TOURMALINE-AL1 NCT01659658), 168 patients with relapsed/refractory AL amyloidosis after 1-2 prior lines were randomized to ixazomib (4 mg, days 1, 8, 15) plus dexamethasone (20 mg, days 1, 8, 15, 22; n = 85) or physician's choice (dexamethasone ± melphalan, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or lenalidomide; n = 83) in 28-day cycles until progression or toxicity. Primary endpoints were hematologic response rate and 2-year vital organ deterioration or mortality rate. Only the first primary endpoint was formally tested at this interim analysis. Best hematologic response rate was 53% with ixazomib-dexamethasone vs 51% with physician's choice (p = 0.76). Complete response rate was 26 vs 18% (p = 0.22). Median time to vital organ deterioration or mortality was 34.8 vs 26.1 months (hazard ratio 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.87; p = 0.01). Median treatment duration was 11.7 vs 5.0 months. Adverse events of clinical importance included diarrhea (34 vs 30%), rash (33 vs 20%), cardiac arrhythmias (26 vs 15%), nausea (24 vs 14%). Despite not meeting the first primary endpoint, all time-to-event data favored ixazomib-dexamethasone. These results are clinically relevant to this relapsed/refractory patient population with no approved treatment options.

Outcomes with different administration schedules of bortezomib in bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) as first-line therapy in multiple myeloma

Induction therapy for multiple myeloma with bortezomib (Velcade), lenalidomide (Revlimid), and dexamethasone (d) (VRd) was traditionally administered as bortezomib given twice weekly on a 3 week cycle. A modified schedule of weekly bortezomib has been adopted over time to decrease treatment burden for patients and reduce treatment-emergent neuropathy. This study evaluates the response rates and outcomes with different schedules of bortezomib in VRd administered for first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). We retrospectively analyzed patients treated with upfront VRd from June 30th 2008 to December 31st 2018, for variations of bortezomib administration. Five hundred and fifty-five (555) NDMM patients met inclusion criteria; median age 63 years and 61% men. Bortezomib was administered twice weekly every 21 days in 43%, once weekly every 21 days in 41% and once weekly every 28 days in 16%. Though peripheral sensory neuropathy was more frequent with twice weekly dosing (P = .002), this group achieved shorter time to best response (P = .01). Weekly every 21-day treatment saw higher VGPR or better rates (P = .02). However, with median follow up time of 37 months (IQR 22-56), we found no difference in PFS or OS among the groups. While small differences in response rates were found among the varying administration schedules of bortezomib administration, there was no significant effect on PFS or OS. Given that VRd remains a first line standard of care option for newly diagnosed MM, in the absence of a large trial comparing bortezomib dosing schedule modifications, these results are helpful in supporting current practices of once weekly administration.

Updates in the Diagnosis and Management of AL Amyloidosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Light chain (AL) amyloidosis is an insidious progressive disease which results in significant morbidity and inevitable mortality if not diagnosed and treated promptly. This review will highlight recent developments and summarize critical clinical points and updated practice changes for the clinician in 2020.

RECENT FINDINGS

Comparative analyses of staging systems, updated prognostic tools, and treatment response criteria now allow for improved patient stratification and treatment decisions; the role of minimal residual disease in response assessment is still being assessed. Clinical and genetic predictors for long-term survivors have been highlighted. Standard-of-care front-line bortezomib and the integration of anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies in the relapsed disease have transformed treatment approach in recent years. Various clinical trials in the pipeline include novel anti-plasma cell therapies and therapies directed against amyloid deposits which promise to further advance the treatment landscape. Diagnosis, response assessment, and treatment paradigms for AL amyloidosis have evolved significantly in the past 15 years, translating into superior outcomes and increased chances of long-term survival for AL amyloidosis.

Humanistic and economic impact of subcutaneous versus intravenous administration of oncology biologics

More oncology biologics are becoming available for subcutaneous (sc.) administration and are expected to provide useful therapeutic options. We evaluated evidence published in the past 5 years to assess the humanistic and economic impact of sc. versus intravenous administration of approved cancer therapies and identify outcomes favoring either administration route. These publications focused predominantly on healthcare resource utilization and economic outcomes, demonstrating resource and cost savings with sc. administration. Patients reported a better health-related quality of life and preference for sc. formulations. Time-and-motion study analyses confirmed the convenience of sc. administration. These findings suggest that future availability of sc. oncology biologics, especially anti-PD-1/PD-ligand 1 antibodies due to their increased utility in various malignancies, may be beneficial for patients, healthcare providers and payers.

Once-weekly bortezomib had similar effectiveness and lower thrombocytopenia occurrence compared with twice-weekly bortezomib regimen in treating patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in China

The study aims to examine the treatment effect and adverse reactions of patients with newly diagnosed MM receiving different bortezomib-based regimens.This was a retrospective study of patients with newly diagnosed MM and who were treated with bortezomib-based combined chemotherapy at the Department of Hematology of the 2 affiliated hospitals of Wenzhou Medical University between July 2009 and May 2016. Cox proportion hazard multivariate analyses were carried out to assess the differences in treatment effect and adverse events between standard (1.3 mg/m on days 1, 4, 8, 11) and weekly (1.6 mg/m on days 1, 8, 15) cohorts, as well as the differences between intravenous injection and subcutaneous injection therapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test.Among the 117 patients, 78 patients were treated with bortezomib standard therapy and 39 patients were treated with bortezomib weekly therapy (all with intravenous injection). In all patients, the treatment strategy was not independently associated with PFS or OS. The patients in the weekly therapy group had less thrombocytopenia events than those in the standard therapy group. The subcutaneous route had similar treatment effect as the intravenous route, but the incidence of peripheral neuropathy was lower.The once-weekly bortezomib regimen was similar in effectiveness to standard therapy in treating patients with newly diagnosed MM, but the incidence of thrombocytopenia was lower with the weekly regimen compared with the standard regimen.

Pilot Study of Bortezomib and Dexamethasone Pre- and Post-Risk-Adapted Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in AL Amyloidosis

Treatment for AL amyloidosis aims to eradicate clonal plasma cells, thereby disrupting the amyloid deposition causing organ damage. Risk-adapted high-dose melphalan plus autologous stem cell transplantation (RA-ASCT) is an effective therapy. We conducted a prospective pilot analysis of a comprehensive approach using bortezomib and dexamethasone (BD) before and after RA-ASCT in 19 patients. BD induction (up to 3 cycles of bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² i.v. and dexamethasone 40 mg orally [p.o.] or i.v. on days 1, 4, 8, and 11) was followed by RA-ASCT and then BD consolidation (6 cycles of bortezomib 1.3 mg/m²i.v. and dexamethasone 20 mg p.o. or i.v. weekly for 4 weeks, every 12 weeks). The overall hematologic response rate (partial response or better) was 95%, including 37% minimal residual disease negative [MRD(-)] complete response (CR) by flow cytometry (sensitivity up to 1/10⁶ cells). At 2 years, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were 68% (95% confidence interval [CI], 50% to 93%) and 84% (95% CI, 69% to 99%), respectively, with median duration of follow-up in survivors of 61 months (range, 42 to 84 months). In a landmark analysis, patients achieving MRD(-) CR had superior PFS (P= .008). This approach is safe and yields deep and durable remissions promoting organ recovery. Each treatment phase deepened the response. Future aims include improving the efficacy and toxicity of each phase.

Subcutaneous bortezomib might be standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Administration of subcutaneous (SC) bortezomib in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) has increased in recent years. Yet, it is unclear whether there is sufficient evidence to support the use of SC bortezomib as a standard of care.

Methods: A systematic review of 4 randomized controlled trials and 8 retrospective trials comparing SC to intravenous (IV) bortezomib among 1,857 MM patients was performed. Embase, PubMed, Clinical Trials.gov, Cochrane Library and reference lists were searched for relevant studies from inception until August 2018. Outcomes of interest included 1-year overall survival (OS), 1-year progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs). Random events meta-analyses were performed. We also performed sensitivity analysis to examine whether the results of the meta-analysis were robust.

Results: Compared to IV administration, SC bortezomib had a significantly lower incidence of some all-grade or grade 3–4 AE, such as peripheral sensory neuropathy, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia (p<0.05). There was no statistical difference in 1-year OS, 1-year PFS, ORR between SC and IV bortezomib (p>0.05).

Conclusion: The data presented so far consistently show that SC bortezomib has become a standard of care for patients with MM.

Bortezomib-based therapy for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in real-world medical practice

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based therapy for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in clinical trials may differ from the oncology practice experience. The electronic VELCADE^® OBservational Study was designed to prospectively evaluate bortezomib for multiple myeloma (MM) in real-world medical practice.

METHOD

Patients scheduled to receive intravenous bortezomib for MM were eligible. The primary objective was to evaluate clinical outcomes, including response, time to response, time to next therapy, treatment-free interval, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives included safety and healthcare resource utilization.

RESULTS

In total, 873 patients with a median of two therapy lines prior to initiating bortezomib were included. The overall response rate (≥partial response) was 69%, including 37% complete response/near-complete response. Median time to response was 1.8 months, median time to next therapy was 9.7 months, and median treatment-free interval was 7.9 months. After 22.6 months' median follow-up, median PFS was 12.0 months and median OS was 36.1 months. The most common adverse events (AEs) were neuropathy not otherwise specified (19%), diarrhea NOS, and thrombocytopenia (each 17%); 230 (26%) patients discontinued bortezomib due to AEs. Of 689 (79%) patients without baseline peripheral neuropathy (PN), the rate of new-onset any-grade PN increased to 51% (12% grade 3/4) by cycle 8. Overall, 244 (28%) patients were hospitalized, 372 (43%) attended an outpatient visit, and 341 (39%) underwent a diagnostic/therapeutic procedure during bortezomib treatment.

CONCLUSION

These prospective real-world data demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of bortezomib-based therapy for RRMM and confirm high response rates and long OS for this population.

The start of a new wave: Developments in proteasome inhibition in multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) accounts for 10% of hematological cancers. Stem cell transplantation remains the cornerstone of first-line treatment for eligible patients, but historically, pharmaceutical treatment options for MM have been limited. The proteasome was identified as a target for MM therapy in the early 2000s and, in 2004, the boronic acid proteasome inhibitor bortezomib gained European approval. Bortezomib now plays a major role in MM treatment, but the duration of its use can be limited by toxicities such as peripheral neuropathy and the development of resistance. A new generation of proteasome inhibitors has since entered the treatment landscape: carfilzomib, an epoxyketone-based agent with a distinct mode of action, high clinical efficacy, and lower levels of peripheral neuropathy compared with bortezomib, received approval in 2015 for use in patients with relapsed and/or refractory MM (RRMM). Ixazomib, a second-generation, orally administered, boronic acid proteasome inhibitor, has also been approved for use in patients with RRMM. In just over a decade, proteasome inhibitor-based regimens have become an integral component of MM treatment; with more proteasome inhibitors in development, this remains a vibrant research area with potential to improve the lives of patients with MM in the years to come.