may be the best maintenance treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, say the authors of a systematic review and meta-analysis.
, from the division of hematology at the University of Torino (Italy), and her coauthors wrote that despite the well-recognized importance of novel agent–based maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma, there is a lack of direct or indirect comparisons between the available regimens.
In a paper published online in, the researchers reported the results of the systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 prospective, phase 3 randomized, controlled trials of eight varieties of maintenance therapy, in 5,073 participants with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.
Their analysis found that lenalidomide-based regimens showed the best progression-free survival rates (hazard ratio, 0.39 for lenalidomide plus prednisone; HR, 0.47 for lenalidomide alone), compared with placebo, and in 74% of the network meta-analysis simulations, they were the most effective options.
Four other maintenance treatment options - thalidomide-interferon, thalidomide-bortezomib, bortezomib-prednisone, and thalidomide alone – also showed progression-free survival gains – but interferon therapy failed to show any benefit.
However, for overall survival, lenalidomide alone was the best option, followed by thalidomide-bortezomib and bortezomib-prednisone. None of the other regimens considered showed benefits for overall survival.
“Long-term use of lenalidomide undoubtedly has advantages, owing to the lack of neuropathy, which is the main factor limiting the long-term use of both thalidomide and bortezomib,” the authors wrote.
When the authors restricted their analysis to trials conducted in the setting of autologous stem cell transplantation they found similar results, with lenalidomide-based regimens having the best progression-free and overall survival.
Patients with a good prognosis and standard-risk chromosomal abnormalities also did best with lenalidomide-based maintenance, while those with a poor prognosis – for example, with ISS stage III disease – benefited more from bortezomib-based maintenance. However patients with high-risk chromosomal abnormalities gained no advantage from any regimen, which the authors suggested may relate to small sample size, different cut-off points or their extremely poor prognosis.
The authors noted that their analysis did not take into account adverse events, drug discontinuations, or quality of life but focused solely on progression-free survival and overall survival.
“An increase in second primary malignant disease with prolonged lenalidomide therapy has been reported, but the survival benefit overcame the risk in all the trials,” they wrote.
They also commented that better treatment options are needed for patients with aggressive disease, and there are ongoing trials looking at second-generation proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and monoclonal antibodies for maintenance therapy.
Most authors declared research funding, advisory board positions, fees and honoraria from the pharmaceutical industry, including lenalidomide manufacturer Celgene.
SOURCE: Gay F et al. 2018 Aug 9. .