The Myeloma Beacon

Independent, up-to-date news and information for the multiple myeloma community.
Home page Deutsche Artikel Artículos Españoles

Forums

Discussion about multiple myeloma treatments, stem cell transplants, clinical trials, alternative medicines, supplements, and their benefits and side effects.

Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by Beacon Staff on Thu May 01, 2014 10:17 am

Dr. Vincent Rajkumar, one of the Beacon's physician columnists, contributed an article to the ASCO Post recently on the subject of Revlimid [lenalidomide] maintenance therapy. The article is similar in many ways to the columns Dr. Rajkumar has published here at The Beacon, so we thought we would bring it to the attention of our readers.

"Maintenance Therapy in Multiple Myeloma," SV Rajkumar, The ASCO Post, May 1, 2014, Volume 5, Issue 7.

The article focuses mainly on the results of the U.S. Revlimid maintenance trial and a similar trial done in France. Of those two trials, just one -- the U.S. trial -- has shown an overall survival benefit for post-transplant Revlimid maintenance.

Dr. Rajkumar offers some useful insights into the details of the survival benefit seen in the U.S. trial, noting, for example,

35% of patients in the U.S. trial had received lenalidomide as [initial therapy prior to their stem cell transplant], and these were the patients who contributed to the significant survival benefit. No significant survival differences were seen in patients not receiving lenalidomide induction. How does this affect interpretation?

Since the response and toxicity to lenalidomide use was known a priori in a substantial subset of patients screened for enrollment in the U.S. trial, patients who did not respond and those with undue toxicity with lenalidomide induction were naturally less likely to have been enrolled. On the other hand, patients in whom a clear survival benefit was observed were those who received prior lenalidomide, and were most likely already known to be responsive and tolerating such therapy well at the time of randomization.

The recommendations Dr. Rajkumar makes at the end of the article regarding maintenance mirror those in the Mayo's "MSmart" guidelines that have been discussed frequently here in the forum. They are as follows:

For standard-risk patients, we recommend 2 months of lenalidomide consolidation following autologous stem cell transplantation. ... After 2 months of consolidation, if patients are known to be lenalidomide-responsive and are not in very good partial response or complete response, we recommend lenalidomide maintenance ...

As far as duration of therapy, we recommend capping maintenance at approximately 2 years ...

For intermediate- and high-risk patients, we prefer bortezomib (Velcade)-based maintenance based on the results of several recent trials ...

The most recent update to the Mayo Clinic's "msmart" guidelines are discussed in this recent forum thread.

Beacon Staff

Re: Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by coachhoke on Thu May 01, 2014 11:27 am

Getting personal ... I went from an 0.9 M-spike to 0.4 on 4 cycles of Velcade and dexa­metha­sone; no transplant. Have been on Revlimid for 16 months; M-spike remaining steady at 0.1.

Other than a blood clot and thus addition of Coumadin [warfarin], nothing else significant.

How much longer should I stay on Revlimid? (my oncologist is suggesting remain the course until disease progression).

Thanks,
Coach Hoke

coachhoke
Name: coachhoke
When were you/they diagnosed?: Apri 2012
Age at diagnosis: 71

Re: Dr. Rajkumar's thoughts on maintenance therapy

by DallasGG on Thu May 01, 2014 12:49 pm

One of the recommendations is:

"For standard-risk patients, we recommend 2 months of lenalidomide [Revlimid] consolida­tion following autologous stem cell transplantation. After 2 months of consolidation, if patients are known to be lenalidomide-responsive and are not in very good partial response or complete response, we recommend lenalidomide maintenance ..."

My question is: When does the 2 months of lenalidomide consolidation start? Does this start immediately after the transplant, or at the 100-day point after the transplant?

I am now at day +83 after my transplant and will be soon trying to decide (with my doctor's advice) what my next step is: maintenance or no maintenance. Did I already miss the boat on the 2 months of lenalidomide consolidation treatment?

When I last talked to my doctor about 5 weeks ago, he told me that a very viable option for me would be no maintenance treatment since I was in complete remission. I would consider the 2 months of lenalidomide consolidation treatment if it would make a difference in the long run. The article also posed this question:

"A more reasonable interpretation is that if 2 months of consolidation can provide all of the improved survival that comes with 4 years of maintenance, why not go with that? After all, 2 months’ consolidation is less toxic, carries little risk of second cancers, and is much less expensive!"

DallasGG
Name: Kent
Who do you know with myeloma?: myself
When were you/they diagnosed?: 6/20/2013
Age at diagnosis: 56

Re: Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by Mark on Thu May 01, 2014 1:44 pm

Thanks for posting. An excellent article - IMO all patients should read this article. It is great to have a doctor that thinks about patients QOL writing thoughtful articles like this one.

"In fact, indefinite maintenance until disease progression virtually ensures continuous lifelong drug therapy for myeloma patients, at a time when median survival for younger standard-risk patients is approaching > 10 years. A clear overall survival benefit will still justify this approach, particularly if therapy is reasonably well tolerated. Chronic myelogenous leukemia is a good example in this situation. However, we simply do not have data that survival is convincingly prolonged, at least as of now. Even in the U.S. study that found a survival benefit, we know that not all subgroups derived an improvement in survival. And we do know that some patients can be harmed."

Mark

Re: Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by Eric Hofacket on Fri May 02, 2014 12:21 pm

"Subsequently, three randomized trials found that the timing of stem cell transplantation (early vs transplant at first relapse) does not affect overall survival, but we generally favor early stem cell transplant since it provides a longer time without therapy or toxicity. "

I found this interesting. There has been discussion in a number of threads on the Beacon about early, late or no SCT. It appears there is little difference in outcome between early and late SCT. It is always nice to have more flexibility in treatment plans and options.

Eric Hofacket
Name: Eric H
When were you/they diagnosed?: 01 April 2011
Age at diagnosis: 44

Re: Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by blair77 on Tue May 06, 2014 6:57 pm

What do we base "high risk" status on exactly? Just cytogenetics? Or also stage? Beta 2 microglobulin? Response to therapy?

blair77
Who do you know with myeloma?: My husband
When were you/they diagnosed?: April 2013
Age at diagnosis: 43

Re: Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by Beacon Staff on Tue May 06, 2014 7:07 pm

Hi Blair,

The Mayo definitions of the different risk categories are explained in their "msmart" guidelines, which are discussed in this recent thread (referenced above), and in this PDF overview of the guidelines (see page 4).

The current International Myeloma Working Group definition of the low-, standard-, and high-risk multiple myeloma are summarized in this important Myeloma Beacon news article from late last summer:

Experts Publish Consensus Risk Classification For Multiple Myeloma

(One thing to note about the article -- as several people who commented on it mentioned -- is that the survival numbers in it are probably out of date and thus pessimistic.)

Beacon Staff

Re: Dr. Rajkumar on maintenance therapy

by coachhoke on Tue May 06, 2014 8:48 pm

Upon reaching a very good partial response without a transplant, is 2years of maintainance adequate?

Coach Hoke. 73 years old and in very good health except for multiple myeloma

coachhoke
Name: coachhoke
When were you/they diagnosed?: Apri 2012
Age at diagnosis: 71


Return to Treatments & Side Effects