Initial Treatment With Cyclophosphamide, Velcade, And Dexamethasone Compares Favorably In Terms Of Response Rates And Side Effects

Results of a recent study show that newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients initially treated with a combination of cyclophosphamide, Velcade, and dexamethasone have better response rates and less severe side effects than patients treated with Revlimid-dexamethasone or cyclophosphamide-Revlimid-dexamethasone.
The survival outcomes for the patients treated with cyclophosphamide, Velcade, and dexamethasone also are promising.
However, the difference in survival rates between the three treatment regimens is not statistically significant.
This is partly because "the numbers [of patients in the study] were too small to show differences in survival,” explained Dr. Craig Reeder of the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona, and one of the authors of the study.
The study compared data from three independent Phase 2 clinical trials, which – according to the study authors – resulted in additional limitations, including a lack of both consistency in control groups and randomization of participants.
Furthermore, the study authors pointed out that the follow-up time was short, leaving no information on longer-term effects. They suggested that further examination of survival outcomes will require a larger Phase 3 study.
Stem cell transplantation using a patient's own stem cells has become a standard treatment option for myeloma patients under the age of 65.
For this reason, it is increasingly necessary to have effective induction therapies - used prior to stem cell harvesting and transplantation - that are not toxic to stem cells.
Previous studies have shown that the combinations of cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan) plus Velcade (bortezomib) and dexamethasone (Decadron) (abbreviated CyBorD), Revlimid (lenalidomide) plus dexamethasone (abbreviated RD), and cyclophosphamide plus RD (abbreviated as CRD), are effective as initial therapies for myeloma patients.
According to the study authors, however, there have been no formal comparisons of the efficacy and safety of these three treatment regimens to date.
To make this comparison, researchers from the Mayo Clinic and the University Health Network in Toronto retrospectively analyzed the medical records from 150 newly diagnosed myeloma patients who received one of the three treatments as part of Phase 2 trials in the period from 2004 to 2008.
The median age of the participants was 62.5 years old. Of the 150 patients, 27 percent were defined as high-risk due to genetic abnormalities and 53 percent subsequently received stem cell transplantation.
After four 28-day cycles of treatment, patients who received CyBorD demonstrated greater overall response rates as well as deeper responses than patients receiving the other two combination regimens.
Overall response rates were 89 percent, 88 percent, and 79 percent in the CyBorD, RD, and CRD patient groups, respectively. These differences were not large enough to be statistically significant.
The differences in depth of response, however, were large enough to be significant.
Patients in the CyBorD group had a combined complete and near complete response rate of 41 percent, and a very good partial response rate of 24 percent. This compares to 12 percent and 23 percent, respectively, for patients who received the RD regimen, and 2 percent and 28 percent for patients treated with the CRD regimen.
Survival measures were similar across all three treatment groups. The progression-free survival times for CyBorD, RD, and CRD were 2.7 years, 3.2 years, and 2.3 years, respectively, with a median progression-free survival of 2.6 years for all patients.
The three-year overall survival rates by treatment group were 88 percent, 88 percent, and 79 percent, respectively, for the CyBorD, RD, and CRD groups. For all 150 patients, the median four-year overall survival was 80 percent.
Transplanted patients had a higher three-year overall survival rate (95 percent) compared to patients who did not receive a transplant (75 percent).
Trial participants categorized as high-risk relapsed earlier than standard-risk patients, with a median progression-free survival of 2.1 years and 2.7 years, respectively.
Participants receiving CyBorD showed lower rates of either severe or life-threatening side effects (33 percent and 8 percent, respectively) than those receiving RD (50 percent and 6 percent, respectively) or CRD (49 percent and 25 percent, respectively).
However, the CyBorD group had higher rates of peripheral neuropathy (59 percent) than both the RD group (21 percent) and CRD group (15 percent). Peripheral neuropathy is numbness or tingling, typically in the hands or feet, that can occur as a side effect of myeloma treatment.
According to Dr. Reeder, further studies of these combination therapies in post-stem cell transplantation treatment are planned.
For more information, please see the study in the British Journal of Haematology (abstract).
Related Articles:
- Adding Clarithromycin To Velcade-Based Myeloma Treatment Regimen Fails To Increase Efficacy While Markedly Increasing Side Effects
- Sustained Complete Response To Initial Treatment Associated With Substantial Survival Benefit In Multiple Myeloma
- Nelfinavir-Velcade Combination Very Active In Advanced, Velcade-Resistant Multiple Myeloma
- Revlimid, Velcade, and Dexamethasone, Followed By Stem Cell Transplantation, Yields Deep Responses And Considerable Overall Survival In Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma
- Nelfinavir Shows Only Limited Success In Overcoming Revlimid Resistance In Multiple Myeloma Patients
Thank you very much for this article.
I was wondering. How do the response rates and side effects for the CyBorD combination compare to the ones for the Revlimid, Velcade, dexamethasone combination that is being used more and more for newly diagnosed patients?
I thought I read somewhere that the overall response rate for the RVD combination is close to 100 percent.
If that's true, why would a doctor choose the CyBorD combination instead of the RVD combination?
Thanks for your question, Ricardo.
Yes, there have been reports of overall response rates equal to 100 percent for the RVD combination. (Overall response rate = a partial response or better.) So that's better than what the authors of this study got for the CyBorD combination (89 percent).
However, the depth of response for the CyBorD combination seems to be similar to what one gets with RVD.
For example, the combined near complete and complete response rate for CyBorD was 41 percent according to the study summarized above. In comparison, at the ASCO annual meeting in 2010, there was a report that, in a clinical trial, the combined near complete and complete response rate for the RVD combination was 39 percent.
Also, the CyBorD regimen does not include Revlimid. That may be viewed as a positive by some myeloma specialists when it comes to the treatment of patients who may later receive a stem cell transplant. There have been concerns that Revlimid, when used as an induction therapy, may reduce the ability of patients to produce enough stem cells for a stem cell transplant.
In some countries, legal limitations also may restrict the use of Revlimid in induction therapy, because Revlimid is not yet officially approved for use as a treatment for newly diagnosed myeloma patients in either the U.S. or Europe.
Am I reading the numbers wrong or does adding Cytoxan to Rev/Dex produce a less efficacious result?
Thanks for your question, Stephan.
Yes, what you noticed is correct. It is not an error.
The patients in the CRD group had lower treatment response rates compared to the patients in the RD group.
That statement holds true if you're looking only at overall response rates, or if you are comparing combined near complete and complete response rates.
It is possible, of course, that adding cyclophosphamide to the RD combination interferes in some way with its efficacy.
An alternative explanation, however, may be that there simply was a difference in the patient population between the RD and CRD patient groups.
And, in fact, if you look at the data, you find that the CRD patient group had a larger share of patients with later stage myeloma. About 65 percent of the CRD patient group was ISS Stage 2 or Stage 3 at diagnosis, compared to 53 percent of the RD patient group.
Get new Myeloma Beacon articles by email.