Abstract
Introduction/Methods: This international phase 3 study conducted at 93 sites is the largest randomized study to date in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Patients (pts) had to have received 1–3 prior therapies and those with dexamethasone (Dex) refractory disease were excluded. Pts were randomized to bortezomib (VELCADE®) 1.3 mg/m2 IV d 1, 4, 8, 11 q3wk for 8 cycles followed by 3 cycles on d 1, 8, 15, 22 q5wk, or Dex 40 mg PO d 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 q5wk for 4 cycles followed by 5 cycles on d 1–4 every 28 d. The 1° endpoint was time to progression (TTP); 2° endpoints included survival, response rate (CR+PR) using EBMT criteria, duration of response, time to response (TTR), time to skeletal events, infections ≥gr 3 and safety; exploratory endpoints included pharmacogenomics and quality of life. Pts with progressive disease on Dex were eligible to crossover to bortezomib in a companion study.
Results: 669 pts were randomized and baseline characteristics were balanced in both arms. Based on a median follow-up of 8.3 mo, bortezomib demonstrated a 78% improvement in median TTP (hazard ratio 0.55, P<0.0001) and a significant 1-y and overall survival benefit over Dex (hazard ratio 0.53, P=0.0005; hazard ratio 0.57, P=0.0013, respectively). The response rate (CR+PR) was significantly higher (P<0.0001) with CR/nCR rates of 13% for bortezomib vs 2% for Dex. 132 (40%) and 119 (35%) pts received bortezomib or Dex 2nd line, respectively. Importantly, in 2nd-line bortezomib vs Dex, median TTP was 7.0 v 5.6 mo, 1-y survival was 89% vs 72%, and CR+PR rate was 45% vs 26%, respectively. The incidence of ≥ gr 3 adverse events and the discontinuation rate were similar across treatments in all pts.
Conclusion: This is the first and largest randomized study demonstrating a survival advantage in relapsed MM, with single-agent bortezomib proving superior to Dex based on TTP, survival, and response. Superiority was also observed in 2nd line and later salvage therapy. The safety profiles of bortezomib and Dex were predictable and toxicities were manageable.
Efficacy . | Bortezomib . | Dex . | P . |
---|---|---|---|
. | (n=333) . | (n=336) . | . |
NC = not calculated. | |||
Median TTP, mo | 6.2 | 3.5 | <0.0001 |
1 prior line | 7.0 (n=132) | 5.6 (n=119) | 0.0021 |
> 1 prior line | 4.9 (n=200) | 2.9 (n=217) | <0.0001 |
1-year survival, % | 80 | 66 | 0.0005 |
1 prior line | 89 | 72 | 0.0098 |
> 1 prior line | 73 | 62 | 0.0109 |
CR, % (n/N) | 6 (20/315) | 1 (2/312) | 0.0001 |
1 prior line | 6 (8/128) | 2 (2/110) | 0.0842 |
> 1 prior line | 6 (12/187) | 0 (0/202) | 0.0002 |
CR/PR, % (n/N) | 38 (121/315) | 18 (56/312) | <0.0001 |
1 prior line | 45 (57/128) | 26 (29/110) | 0.0035 |
> 1 prior line | 34 (64/187) | 13 (27/202) | <0.0001 |
Median TTR (CR/PR), d | 43 | 43 | NC |
Efficacy . | Bortezomib . | Dex . | P . |
---|---|---|---|
. | (n=333) . | (n=336) . | . |
NC = not calculated. | |||
Median TTP, mo | 6.2 | 3.5 | <0.0001 |
1 prior line | 7.0 (n=132) | 5.6 (n=119) | 0.0021 |
> 1 prior line | 4.9 (n=200) | 2.9 (n=217) | <0.0001 |
1-year survival, % | 80 | 66 | 0.0005 |
1 prior line | 89 | 72 | 0.0098 |
> 1 prior line | 73 | 62 | 0.0109 |
CR, % (n/N) | 6 (20/315) | 1 (2/312) | 0.0001 |
1 prior line | 6 (8/128) | 2 (2/110) | 0.0842 |
> 1 prior line | 6 (12/187) | 0 (0/202) | 0.0002 |
CR/PR, % (n/N) | 38 (121/315) | 18 (56/312) | <0.0001 |
1 prior line | 45 (57/128) | 26 (29/110) | 0.0035 |
> 1 prior line | 34 (64/187) | 13 (27/202) | <0.0001 |
Median TTR (CR/PR), d | 43 | 43 | NC |
Author notes
Corresponding author