High-Dose Kyprolis Extends Progression-Free Survival Versus Velcade In Head-To-Head Relapsed Myeloma Trial
Initial results of a large, head-to-head clinical trial show that relapsed myeloma patients treated with high-dose Kyprolis and dexamethasone had twice the progression-free survival of relapsed patients treated with Velcade and dexamethasone.
Median progression-free survival in the Phase 3 trial was 18.7 months in trial participants treated with high-dose Kyprolis (carfilzomib) and dexamethasone (Decadron), compared to 9.4 months in patients treated with Velcade (bortezomib) and dexamethasone.
The results of the so-called “ENDEAVOR” trial were announced this past Sunday evening in a press release issued by Amgen (NASDAQ:AMGN). The company’s Onyx Pharmaceuticals subsidiary developed and markets Kyprolis in the U.S.
The ENDEAVOR results are being released on the heels of publication earlier this year of positive results from another important Kyprolis trial, known as the ASPIRE study. In the ASPIRE study, the combination of Kyprolis, Revlimid (lenalidomide), and dexamethasone noticeably improved progression-free survival in relapsed myeloma patients versus Revlimid and dexamethasone alone.
The ENDEAVOR results announced on Sunday, combined with the results of the ASPIRE trial, “tilt the balance in favor of Kyprolis” in comparisons between the Amgen drug and Velcade, myeloma specialist Dr. Prashant Kapoor of the Mayo Clinic told The Beacon. Other myeloma specialists The Beacon consulted about the ENDEAVOR results also were impressed with Kyprolis’s performance in the trial.
Caveats When Interpreting The Trial Results
There are, however, at least two issues related to the ENDEAVOR study that hamper conclusions about the relative effectiveness of Kyprolis and Velcade in day-to-day use.
First, patients could participate in the ENDEAVOR trial if they had been treated previously with either Velcade or Kyprolis.
In practice, this eligibility requirement is likely to mean that many more patients in the study had been previously treated with Velcade than with Kyprolis. Velcade is readily available in most, if not all, the countries where the ENDEAVOR trial was conducted, and the drug is frequently used as first-line therapy. Kyprolis, on the other hand, is only available through participation in a clinical trial in most countries other than the U.S.
Patients who have been previously treated with any myeloma therapy – whether it be Velcade, Kyprolis, or some other drug – tend not to respond as well to re-treatment with the same drug than patients who have never been treated with the drug.
Thus, because the ENDEAVOR trial is likely to have enrolled many more Velcade pre-treated patients than Kyprolis pre-treated patients, it was inclined from the start to find more benefit from Kyprolis treatment than Velcade treatment.
The second issue with the study design is that the Kyprolis dose in the trial was twice the FDA-approved dose. Myeloma specialists are increasingly experimenting with higher-than-approved Kyprolis doses. However, in day-to-day practice, dosing closer to the approved dose is likely to be more common.
Because treatment response tends to be dose-related, the higher Kyprolis dose used in the ENDEAVOR trial also made it more likely that the Kyprolis-treated patients would see a better response to treatment than the Velcade-treated patients.
Safety Results From The Trial
It seems unlikely that either of the two issues just described, alone or in combination with one another, would completely negate the Kyprolis progression-free survival advantage observed in the ENDEAVOR trial. Nonetheless, the issues do make assessing the “true” survival advantage more challenging.
This is important, in part, because Kyprolis-treated patients in the ENDEAVOR study were more likely to experience several potentially serious side effects than the Velcade-treated patients.
In particular, patients who received Kyprolis during the study were more likely to experience heart failure, kidney failure, high blood pressure, and breathlessness than the Velcade-treated patients.
Amgen noted in its announcement of the trial results, though, that the rates of heart failure and kidney failure observed among the Kyprolis-treated patients in the ENDEAVOR trial were similar to those seen in the ASPIRE trial. Myeloma specialists generally have reacted positively to the Kyprolis safety results from the ASPIRE trial.
Amgen also reported, however, that the rates of high blood pressure and breathlessness among Kyprolis-treated patients were higher in the ENDEAVOR trial than in the ASPIRE trial.
At the same time, peripheral neuropathy occurred less frequently in the Kyprolis-treated patients in the ENDEAVOR trial than the Velcade-treated patients.
Also, despite the difference in how often some side effects occurred in the two arms of the ENDEAVOR trial, there was no statistically significant difference in how often the Kyprolis- and Velcade-treated patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference in the number of deaths while on treatment between the two groups of patients.
More On The Efficacy Results From The Trial
The ENDEAVOR trial was designed with a focus on measuring the progression-free survival of the two groups of patients in the study – those treated with Kyprolis, and those treated with Velcade. Progression-free survival was measured from the start of treatment until either disease progression or death.
As noted earlier, patients in the trial who were treated with high-dose Kyprolis and dexamethasone had a median progression-free survival of 18.7 months versus 9.4 months for the patients treated with Velcade and dexamethasone.
Amgen also has reported that more patients in the Kyprolis arm of the trial responded to treatment than in the Velcade arm of the trial, although no response rates from the trial have yet been published.
As for the overall survival results from the study, Amgen said that they “are not yet mature and continue to be monitored.”
Looking Ahead
Amgen announced in late January that it has filed for the approval of Kyprolis in Europe based on the results of the ASPIRE trial, and it also has requested a broadening of the drug’s approval in the U.S. In addition, the company reported last week that its application for Kyprolis approval in Europe has been accepted for review by the European Medicines Agency.
The ENDEAVOR study is one of three ongoing head-to-head clinical trials comparing Kyprolis and Velcade as myeloma therapies. The two other studies, which also are Phase 3 trials, are comparing the two drugs in newly diagnosed patients.
- The “CLARION” trial is comparing the combination of Kyprolis, melphalan (Alkeran), and prednisone to Velcade, melphalan, and prednisone in newly diagnosed myeloma patients. The global trial, like the ENDEAVOR study, is sponsored by Amgen.
- The “ENDURANCE” trial is comparing Kyprolis, Revlimid, and dexamethasone to Velcade, Revlimid, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed patients. The trial, which is being run by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) in the U.S., also will compare fixed-duration Revlimid maintenance therapy versus Revlimid maintenance until progression.
Head-to-head trials are not yet commonplace among studies testing myeloma therapies. Such comparative trials are, however, being organized more frequently as the number of myeloma therapies approved by regulatory agencies increases, and pharmaceutical companies seek an advantage for their products vis-à-vis the growing number of competitors.
Design of the ENDEAVOR Study
The ENDEAVOR study enrolled 929 relapsed myeloma patients in 235 different locations across the globe.
Patients in the trial had 1 to 3 prior myeloma therapies. Those therapies could include either Velcade or Kyprolis, provided the patient achieved at least a partial response to treatment involving those drugs, and provided it had been at least six months since the patient was last treated with either drug.
Once enrolled in the study, participants were randomly assigned to be treated with either high-dose Kyprolis plus dexamethasone, or Velcade plus dexamethasone.
Kyprolis treatment was twice a week during the first three weeks of a 28-day cycle: Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of the cycle.
The initial Kyprolis dose during the first week of treatment was 20 mg/m2. In subsequent weeks of Cycle 1 – and in all later cycles – the Kyprolis dose was increased to 56 mg/m2. This dose is more than twice the FDA-approved dose of Kyprolis, which is 20 mg/m2 in the first cycle and – if tolerated – 27 mg/m2 in later cycles.
Kyprolis-treated patients also received 20 mg of dexamethasone twice a week in each week of the 28-day treatment cycle: Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, and 23.
Velcade treatment was twice a week during the first two weeks of a 21-day cycle: Days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of the cycle. The drug’s dose was the FDA-approved dose of 1.3 mg/m2. Patients treated with Velcade also received 20 mg of dexamethasone four days per week during the first two weeks of the 21-day cycle: Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 of the cycle.
Patients could be given Velcade either subcutaneously or by infusion, and about 75 percent of the Velcade-treated patients were given the drug subcutaneously.
Both groups of patients in the trial received their assigned treatment regimen until either they could no longer tolerate treatment, disease progression, or death.
Additional information about the design of the trial, including patient eligibility criteria, can be found in the trial information at clinicaltrials.gov.
Related Articles:
- None Found
Sounds like a marketing program by Amgen. Pepsi beats Coke in taste tests.
For those of us that are still using Velcade, what we want to know is once Velcade fails us, will Kyprolis work?
Thank you Myeloma Beacon Staff for this very clear explanation of this trial. Both arms of the trail used also very high doses of dexamethasone in my opinion. My body handles Velcade as well as dexamethasone very badly. Again it will be a balance question between treatment side effects versus desease progression. Thank you again for explaining this trial in words I can understand.
Thanks for the comments, Ron and Christel.
Ron - A lot of patients who have been treated with Velcade, and then relapse, will probably respond to treatment with Kyprolis. There are data on this in the ASPIRE trial results and also in this article we published a while back, "Kyprolis-Revlimid-Dexamethasone Combination Continues To Show Promise For Relapsed Myeloma," (Sep 20, 2013).
Christel - We also noticed the dexamethasone dosing, which is why we included full information about the drug dosing in the article. One thing that is not currently available, but will be interesting to see, is how dose reductions and treatment discontinuations were handled during the trial. The length of treatment, and total drug exposure, are factors that can have a big impact on progression-free survival.
Note that, in its press release, Amgen said that more complete results from the ENDEAVOR trial will be presented at the ASCO annual meeting in late May / early June.
I'm very interested in the trial's criteria for "disease progression."
Hi Coachhoke,
Sorry, I had meant to respond to this question when you asked it over in the forum thread on the ENDEAVOR results, but forgot to do so.
We're fairly certain that the definition of disease progression used in the trial is the standard definition summarized, for example, in the article "Consensus recommendations for the uniform reporting of clinical trials: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 1" (Blood, 2011) (full text PDF).
In particular, for the majority of patients who have disease that can be tracked via their M-spike, progression is usually defined as occurring when the M-spike increases by more than 25 percent from the lowest value achieved during treatment, provided the increase is at least 0.5 g/dL.
We are checking with Amgen, however, to confirm the definition of disease progression used in the study and will let you know what we hear back.
If patients who have been previously treated with any myeloma therapy – whether it be Velcade, Kyprolis, or some other drug – tend not to respond as well to re-treatment with the same drug than patients who have never been treated with the drug, why do we even want to consider re-treatment with Velcade?
Takeda reps are pushing this initiative on every call. Regardless, the date shows and I believe it will show superiority over Velcade in efficacy, PFS, and with similar side effects.
I 'am looking forward to ASCO to see how the data will be presented.
Regards,
Fair balance
Thanks for your comment, Roro.
There are various philosophies when it comes to re-treatment with therapies that a patient already has received. Some physicians (and patients) prefer to delay, as long as possible, using new therapies so they can be held in reserve for as long as possible. Others are quicker to move to new therapies at relapse or signs that the disease is progressing.
There also are nuances in both approaches. A physician who prefers to delay the use of new therapies may opt for a new therapy if, for example, a patient did not achieve a deep or lasting response to their last therapy.
We agree that it will be interesting to see the more detailed results from the trial at ASCO and when they are published.
You mentioned some folks wait to start relapse therapy & some start right away. Are there any studies that indicate which approach is better?
I am still on Velcade/Zomata maintenance therapy, but when I do relapse I'd like to know what to do.'
Thank you.
Get new Myeloma Beacon articles by email.