GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Online Resource  (6)
  • Samuel, Sharoon  (6)
  • Medicine  (6)
  • 1
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 5635-5635
    Abstract: Introduction: Rationale for anticancer vaccine therapy is based on humoral and/or cellular response against unique tumor antigens (Ag). Peptide vaccines specific for Ag are under investigation for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Among cell-based vaccines, monocyte derived dendritic cell (MDDC) fused with myeloma cells serve as Ag presenting cells to develop an immune response against a variety of targets. The purpose of this study is to report clinical response and tolerability of anti-myeloma vaccines. Methods: We included phase I and I/II trials developed between January 2008 to December 2017, where vaccines or viruses were used against MM, irrespective of the geo-location, age, and sex. We performed a comprehensive literature search (last update 3-30-2018) using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, AdisInsight, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Results: The initial search identified 2537 early phase studies. After screening by 2 reviewers and categorization by mechanism of action, 25 clinical trials (CT) that involved vaccines and/or viruses were included. We added 1 CT after the manual search. Therapy was given to 3 distinct classes of patients: patients without prior treatment (high risk smoldering MM or stage I MM, 4 CT), as an adjunct therapy for patients undergoing FDA approved treatments [high dose chemotherapy (HDT), allogeneic (allo-SCT) or autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), 9 CT], and patients with residual or relapsed/refractory (RR) disease after FDA approved therapies (11 CT). Of the included 25 CT, 14 have published results available for analysis. For patients without prior treatments, PVX-410, a multi-peptide vaccine, resulted in at least minimal response (MR) in 50% of patients when combined with lenalidomiden and achieved stable disease (SD) for 60% of patients when used alone at 12 months follow up. Treatment with Idiotype-pulsed mature MMDC targeting idiotype proteins in MM showed MR in 30% of patients and SD in 43% of patients at 12 months. For patients receiving vaccines as an adjuvant treatment, recMAGE-A3 resulted in complete response (CR) and very good partial response (VGPR) in 46% and 54% respectively, at 3 months post ASCT follow up. By 12 months post ASCT, these responses were 38% CR and 23% VGPR. Treatment with MDDC (MAGE3 + Survivin + BCMA) resulted in SD in 42% of patients at a median of 25 months post vaccination and 55 months post ASCT. ScFv-FrC, a DNA fusion vaccine, resulted in CR in 50% and MR/SD in 21% at 52 weeks post vaccination. Ongoing CR/PR was maintained for 3+ years in 57 % patients, 4+ years in 36%, and 5+ years in 14% of patients following ASCT; OS was 64% after a median follow up of 85.6 months . Patients treated with MDDCs/tumor cells fusion vaccine had 69% SD after vaccination and 20% SD at a median of 26 months. When vaccines were given as a salvage therapy in RR MM, ImMucin vaccine showed a CR in 30% of patients during treatment, 20% maintained CR, and 13% had SD at a median of 24 months. Galinpepimut-S vaccine showed CR or very good partial response (VGPR) in 37% of patients at a median of 12 months, and 26% CR and VGPR at 18 months, with a progression free survival rate of 23.6 months. Patients receiving mHag loaded host MDDC vaccination also showed 8% CR for 〉 6 years (n=1) and 8% PR for 19 weeks (n=1); 33% had SD. Reolysin (wild-type reovirus), a virus-based vaccine, was used in 3 trials for RR MM patients. When alone, 42% of patients had SD and 58% had PD. When combined with dexamethasone and bortezomib 37% of patients had SD lasting for 3 cycles. Whereas, when combined with dexamethasone and carfilzomib, all patients had decrease in monoclonal proteins, with VGPR reported in 28%, PR in 43%, MR in 8%, and SD in 8% patients after 8 cycles. Most vaccines were well tolerated by patients, only grade (G) 1 and G2 side effects (SE), which were mostly flu-like symptoms and local skin reactions. G3 SE included pneumonia with mHag DC and Bcl2 peptide vaccine, GVHD with hTERT tumor vaccine, DVT and rash seen with scFv-FrC DNA vaccines. G4 SE were rare, but seen with reolysin, requiring 2 patients to be removed from study, and with DC/tumor cell fusion vaccine (1 pulmonary embolism). Conclusion Anti-myeloma vaccination therapy appears to be well tolerated, which makes it a promising adjuvant therapeutic agent against MM. Current data reveals positive immunologic activity in most patients and there is possibility of promising clinical responses with further drug development. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 5656-5656
    Abstract: Introduction Immunotherapy using monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been gaining significance in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). These include naked antibodies, checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs), novel bispecific mAbs targeting two epitopes and antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) having a mAb conjugated to a cytotoxic drug. This review aims to summarize phase I and I/II clinical trials using mABs for the treatment of MM. Methods A comprehensive literature search using data from PubMed, Embase, AdisInsight and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed for identification of early phase (I and I/II) trials of mAbs in MM treatment (January 2008 to December 2017). Studies involving mAbs including targeting antibodies, ADCs, CPIs and bispecific mAbs were included, without considering the geo-location, age, sex or specific eligibility criteria. Drugs already approved by FDA were excluded. Results Total of 2537 phase I and phase I/II studies were identified. After screening by two reviewers and categorization by their mechanism of action, 74 clinical trials (CTs) that involved mAbs as monotherapy or in combination with other chemotherapeutic drugs for the treatment of newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) and relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). 41 CTs are active, completed or discontinued (Table 1) and 33 CTs are recruiting, approved for recruitment or planned. Most explored mechanism of action in these trials was mAb therapy directed against CD38, IL-6, huCD40, PD-L1 and PD-1. Isatuximab (Anti-CD38) has shown objective response rate (ORR) of 〉 50% in combination with lenalidomide (R) or pomalidomide (P) plus dexamethasone (d) in ongoing phase I trials NCT01749969 (n=57) and NCT02283775 (n=89) respectively. According to Vij et al. (2016) and Mikhael et al. (2018), 54% ORR (n=31) and 62% ORR (n=28) was shown by combination of isatuximab with Rd and Pd in 57 and 45 evaluable RRMM patients, respectively. In Vij et al. (2016) study, stringent complete response (sCR) in 2 (3%) patients, very good partial response (VGPR) in 13 (23%) and partial response (PR) in 16 (28%) patients was observed. In Mikhael et al. (2018) study, sCR in 1 (2%) patient, CR in 1 (2%), VGPR in 10 (21%) and PR in 16 (34%) patients was observed. In comparison, Martin et al. (2014) mentioned ORR of only 24% with isatuximab monotherapy in 34 RRMM patients. Grade (G) ≥3 pneumonia (n=4) was the most common high-grade adverse events (AEs) being reported (Table 2). Siltuximab (Anti-IL-6) has shown clinical efficacy in combination with bortezomib (V) + d and RVd in phase I and I/II CTs. Shah et al. (2016) and Suzuki et al. (2015) found ORR to be 90.9% and 67% in 11 (NDMM) and 9 (RRMM) patients when siltuximab was given combined with RVd and Vd, respectively. Clinical benefit response (CBR) i.e. ≥ minimal response (MR) was 100% with siltuximab + RVd in NDMM patients. In comparison, siltuximab monotherapy in 13 RRMM patients yielded an ORR of 15% (2 CR) as reported by Kurzrock et al. (2012). G≥3 neutropenia (n=9), G≥3 thrombocytopenia (n=6) and G≥3 lymphopenia (n=8) were most common reported high-grade AEs. Checkpoint inhibitors including pembrolizumab (anti-PD-1) and pidilizumab (anti-PD-L1) are being investigated in RRMM treatment. According to Otero et al. (2017) and Ribrag et al. (2017), 50% ORR was obtained with pembrolizumab combined with Rd compared to 0% with monotherapy, respectively. However, combination therapy was associated with G≥3 neutropenia (n=17), thrombocytopenia (n=9) and anemia (n=6) while no high-grade AEs were observed with monotherapy. Antibody-Drug conjugates including lorvotuzumab mertansine and indatuximab ravtansine have been investigated in CTs for MM treatment. Lorvotuzumab mertansine has shown clinical efficacy in combination with Rd in a phase I trial (NCT00991562). Berdeja et al. (2012) reported an ORR of 59% (1 sCR, 1 CR, 8 VGPR, 9 PR) in 32 RRMM patients. In a phase I/II trial (NCT01638936) of indatuximab ravtansine combined with either Rd or Pd, Kelly et al. (2016) showed ORR of 77% with Rd (n=43) including at least 1 CR and 4 VGPR and 79% with Pd (n=14) including 4 VGPR in total 57 RRMM patients. Conclusion Combination regimens including monoclonal antibodies, CPIs and ADCs have shown clinically significant response in RRMM and NDMM patients. The mAbs caused hematological and nonhematological AEs like cytopenias and infections which needs to be monitored closely. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 5640-5640
    Abstract: Background: Elotuzumab (elo) is a humanized monoclonal antibody, which has been approved by the FDA for use in combination with lenalidomide (lena) and dexamethasone (dexa) in patients (pts) with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Elotuzumab is effective as a single agent, as well as in combination for multiple myeloma treatments, supporting the use of elo in pts with RRMM and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) pts. Method: After review of literature using database searches was done on 6/27/18 (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Clinical Trials.gov), 9 prospective and 1 retrospective study with 1128 enrolled pts met the inclusion criteria to date in RRMM and 2 clinical trials including 123 pts in NDMM (Table 1). CMA software v.3 was used for meta-analysis. A random-effect model was applied. Result: Regimens used in RRMM: Based on pooled analysis (95% CI), an overall response rate (ORR) of 66% (54-76.2) was calculated in 685 evaluable pts treated with elo based regimens in RRMM (Figure 1). Most common grade (G) ≥ 3 hematological adverse events (HAE) and non-hematological adverse events (NHAE) based on regimen were calculated using pooled analysis in RRMM pts (Table 2). Anemia was noted in 12.1% ( 7.7-18.6) in 559 pts, while neutropenia in 14.5% (7.5-26.4) out of 591 pts and thrombocytopenia (tcp) in 11.9% (7.9-17.4) in 198 evaluable pts. Diarrhea 5.5% (3.6-8.3), pyrexia 2.4% (1.5-4), peripheral neuropathy (PN) 8.4% (3.8-17.8) were measured in 626, 668 and 143 pts respectively. Elotuzumab as monotherapy: 1 study (n=34) evaluated the efficacy of elo as single agent in RRMM. The median age, time from diagnosis and number of prior therapies were 64.5 years (y) (46-87), 4.4 y (0.9-12.8) and 4.5 y (2-10) respectively. It produced an ORR of 1.4% (0.1-19.1 95% CI) in 34 evaluable pts. Adverse events recorded were pyrexia and fatigue in 17.6% and 8.8% pts respectively. Elotuzumab in two drug regimen: In RRMM, 2 clinical trials (n=49) evaluated the efficacy (95% CI) of elo, ORR of 25% (4.1-72.3) was calculated. The best PFS (progression free survival) produced was in combination of elo 20 mg with bortezumib (bort) 1.3mg/m2 of 9.46 months as compared to 1.8 months when elo10mg/kg + dexamethasone (dexa) 28mg was used. In our analysis for safety, common G≥ 3 HAE calculated were, thrombocytopenia 8.7% (3.3-21.1) n=49, neutropenia 10.7 % (3.5-28.4) n=28 pts and anemia 7.1% (1.8-24.5) n=28 pts. NHAE included diarrhea 1.7% (0.1-22.3), PN 10.7% (3.5-28.4), pyrexia 1.7% (0.1-22.3) in 28 evaluable pts each. Elotuzumab in three drug regimen: In RRMM, 10 clinical trials including 602 pts evaluated the efficacy of elo as a part of triple drug regimen, producing an ORR of 72.2% (54-76.2). The best results were produced with the combination of elo 10-20mg/kg + lenalidomide (lena) 25mg + dexa 40mg producing a PFS of 32.2 mo and 28.62 mo in its phase I and II cohorts respectively. Based on pooled analysis (95% CI) common HAE calculated were neutropenia 17.5% (7.6-35.4) in n=563, thrombocytopenia 12.7% (8.2-19.4) in n=149 and anemia 13% (8-20.5) in n=531 pts. Common G ≥ 3 NHAE estimated were diarrhea 5.7% (3.7-8.6), PN 6.6% (2-19.2), pyrexia 2.5% (1.5-4.1) in 598, 115 and 640 pts respectively. Elotuzumab based regimen in NDMM: A currently ongoing clinical trial NCT02272803 has produced promising results in NDMM pts. As a part of three drug regimen with dose of elo 10mg/kg-20mg/kg, lena 25mg, dexa 20mg in 40 pts produced an ORR of 87.5% (73.2-95.8) versus control group of lena 25mg plus dexa 40mg in 42 pts with an ORR of 73.8% (58-86.1). The PFS rate recorded at 1 year was 93% (79-98%) and 91% (73-97%) respectively. The HAE G ≥ 3 included, neutropenia 18% and leukopenia 15%. In another study with 41 pts, elo was used in combination with lena, bort and dexa producing an ORR of 100% and greater than grade 3 adverse events including Tcp 15%, PN 2%. Conclusion: Results produced in our study suggest that elotuzumab is highly effective when used in pts with RRMM and NDMM. Combination regimens for elo produces an ORR ranging from 79-83% with elo + lena+ dexa, proving that the best results were produced by three drug regimens. Large prospective studies are required to evaluate efficacy and safety of elotuzumab in combination therapies. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 5667-5667
    Abstract: Introduction: Monoclonal antibody's infusion related reactions (IRRs) include anaphylaxis, anaphylactoid reactions and cytokine release syndrome. These reactions are related to the time of infusion. Incidence of IRRs in patients treated with daratumumab is reported to be about 42%. Severity of the most commonly reported IRRs, during the first dose of infusion are between grade I and II. Approved dosage of daratumumab is 16 mg/kg IV weekly given for 1 through 8 weeks, then every 2 weeks from 9th through 24th week, after which it is given every 4 weeks from 25th week onwards, its use is continued until disease progression. The goal of this study is to evaluate the IRRs at cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1) and C1D2, using split dose daratumumab (8 mg/kg) and to look for the impact of prior leukotriene receptor antagonist administration on the incidence of IRRs. Methods: To study the IRRs at day 1 using split dose daratumumab C1D1 (8 mg/kg) and C1D2 (8 mg/kg), we performed a retrospective review of medical records of relapsed/refractory (R/R) multiple myeloma patients receiving daratumumab between December 1st, 2015 to March 31st, 2018 at our center. Key variables related to each patient were recorded from Epic electronic database. Data were summarized using counts and percentages. Results: A total of 35 patients were included and the incidence of IRRs was measured. Overall, 13 (37.14%) patients developed IRRs on day 1. Out of these 13 patients, 11 (84.61%) patients had grade II IRRs, 1 (7.69%) patient had grade I IRRs and 1 (7.69%) patient had grade III IRRs. Nineteen (54.2%) patients out of a total 35 patients were pretreated with montelukast; out of these 19 patients, 5 (26.31%) patients had grade II IRRs and 1 (5.26%) patient had grade III IRRs. Thus, 31.57% patients had IRRs with montelukast pretreatment. No patient had grade I or grade IV IRRs. Sixteen (45.71%) patients out of total 35 patients were not pretreated with Montelukast; out of these 16 patients, 6 (37.5%) patients had grade II IRRs and 1 (6.25%) patient had grade I IRR. No patient had grade III or grade IV IRR. Thus, 43.75% patients had IRRs without montelukast. Overall, 12.18% reduction in IRRs was noted with pretreatment using montelukast. Conclusion: This single center study demonstrates that split dose model of daratumumab in the treatment of R/R multiple myeloma shows lower incidence of IRRs when compared to historical controls reported in the literature. Moreover, pretreatment with leukotriene receptor antagonist also appear to decreases the incidence of IRRs in our patient population. Future randomized prospective trials are needed to support these findings and improving the overall impact on tolerance for daratumumab. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 5231-5231
    Abstract: Introduction Selinexor, a SINE (selective inhibitor of nuclear export) compound, inhibits exportin 1 (XPO1) involved in transport of tumor suppressor proteins leading to apoptosis of tumor cells. XPO1 is overexpressed in variety of cancer including ovarian cancer, pancreatic cancer, glioma, osteosarcoma, leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. The aim of this study is to summarize clinical response and adverse events of selinexor in hematological neoplasms. Methods A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, AdisInsight and Clinicaltrials.gov was completed on July 12, 2018. Studies focusing on efficacy and/or adverse events of selinexor in patients with hematological neoplasms were included for the review. Results Out of 321 studies found on initial search, we finalized 15 studies (8 phase I and 7 phase I/II) after screening by two reviewers. AML: Selinexor in combination with high-dose cytarabine and mitoxantrone has shown overall response rate (ORR) of 70% among 20 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), Wang et al., 2018. Out of 12 newly diagnosed AML (ND AML) patients, 11 (92%) patients showed response with complete response (CR) in 7, CR with incomplete recovery (CRi) in 3 and partial response (PR) in 1 patient. Among 8 relapsed/refractory AML (R/R AML) patients, only 3 patients showed CR while 5 had treatment failure (TF), ORR in this subset was 38%. In 81 evaluable R/R AML patients receiving selinexor as monotherapy only 14% of the patients showed response while 31% patients had disease progression (PD) along with grade ≥3 hematological adverse events (AEs) of thrombocytopenia, anemia and neutropenia in 19%, 15% and 13% patients, respectively (Garzon et al., 2017). MM: Relapsed refractory multiple myeloma patients receiving selinexor combined with pomalidomide and dexamethasone have achieved ORR of 60% with CR in 1 and PR in 5 patients (Chen et al., 2016 n=10) with grade ≥3 neutropenia in 8 patients. In another regimen with doxorubicin and dexamethasone the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 26% with 15% overall response (Rachid et al., 2017 n=27). Grade ≥3 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and hyponatremia occurred in 33%, 33% and 30% of patients, respectively. NHL: Kuruvilla et al. observed ORR in 31% patients with relapsed refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma with single-agent selinexor. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and anemia occurred in 47%, 32% and 27% patients, respectively. The efficacy of selinexor in phase I and I/II clinical trials is given in table 1 while toxicity is mentioned in table 2. With selinexor, the most common hematological and nonhematological AEs noted were thrombocytopenia and hyponatremia, respectively. Conclusion: Selinexor based combination regimens have shown better clinical response against AML as compared to monotherapy. The efficacy results in multiple myeloma and other hematological malignancies are also encouraging. The adverse events like cytopenias were common as in other chemotherapy regimens. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 5629-5629
    Abstract: Introduction Recent studies in novel therapies have created opportunities for new treatment regimens to be used in the management of multiple myeloma. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors lead to epigenetic manipulation of multiple myeloma (MM) cells by reducing resistance to pro-apoptotic signals. Panobinostat is an FDA approved HDAC inhibitor for multiple myeloma. The aim of this article is to study the safety, efficacy and dose limiting toxicities of HDAC inhibitors in the early phase clinical trials in multiple myeloma. Methods We performed a comprehensive literature search for phase I & I/II trials of HDAC inhibitors during last ten years using following databases: PubMed, Embase, AdisInsight, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Studies involving HDAC inhibitors in multiple myeloma other than panobinostat irrespective of the age, sex or specific eligibility criteria were included. Results Out of 2537 studies, we included 25 trials (23 phase I, 2 phase I/II) of HDAC inhibitors in this systematic review having a total of 518 patients. Of these, 471(90.9%) patients were evaluable for response. Vorinostat (Vor) is the most studied drug used in 13 trials (n=281). Two trials had Vor-only regimen and the remaining 11 had combination regimens mostly with lenalidomide and bortezomib. Vor, in combination with lenalidomide (R), bortezomib (V) and dexamethasone (d) has showed 100% overall response rate (ORR) in 30 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients, (Kaufmann et al., 2016), fifty two percent patients achieved very good partial response (VGPR) and 28% patients showed complete response (CR). Another study using Vor + R regimen after autologous stem cell transplant in 16 NDMM patients showed VGPR in 7, stringent complete response (sCR) in 4, partial response (PR) in 2 and CR in 3 patients (Sborov et al.). Grade 3 neutropenia was seen in 1 patient in this study. Richter et al, 2011 showed an ORR of 24% in 29 relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients with Vor only regimen. Another study (Kaufmann et al., 2012) with Vor only regimen used in 10 RRMM patients showed stable disease (SD) in 9 and minimal response (MR) in 1 patient. ORR of 65% was achieved in 31 RRMM patients receiving Vor in combination with doxorubicin & bortezomib (Vorhees et al, 2017). Thrombocytopenia & neutropenia were reported in 94% and 59% patients respectively. Ricolinostat in combination with Rd and Vd achieved an ORR of 55% and 29% respectively in two studies with 38 and 57 evaluable patients (NCT01583283, NCT01323751). Another ricolinostat regimen with pomalidomide & dexamethasone achieved ≥PR in 6/11 RRMM patients (Madan et al., 2016). Table 1 illustrates the efficacy, number of patients and regimens used in all the studies in this systematic review. Quisinostat in a 2017 study by Moreau P et al. (NCT01464112) showed an ORR of 88% in a combination regimen with Vd in RRMM patients (N=18). Drug related adverse events were seen in 13 patients, thrombocytopenia being most common in 11 patients, 2 patients had grade 3 cardiac disorders and 1 patient had a cardiac arrest. Romidepsin in a phase I/II study (Harrison et al., 2011) combined with Vd was used in 25 RRMM patients. ORR was 60% with VGPR n=7, CR n=2, PR n=6, SD n=5 and PD n=1. Grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia in 16, neutropenia in 9 and peripheral neuropathy in 2 patients was seen. Popat et al used combination of two HDAC inhibitors CHR 3996 and tosedostat in 20 RRMM patients. ORR was 10% and SD was seen in 30% patients. Grade 3/4 toxicities seen were thrombocytopenia (n=12), leukopenia (n=6) and diarrhea (n=5). A phase I study on AR-42 drug in 17 RRMM patients (Sborov et al., 2017) showed SD in 10, PD in 4, MR in 3 patients with progression free survival (PFS) of 8.2 months. Thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and lymphopenia were seen in 11, 10 and 6 patients respectively. A detail of all grade 3 and higher adverse events along with dose limiting toxicity is given in table 2. Three trials (NCT02576496, NCT01947140, NCT03051841) of Edo-S101, romidepsin and CKD-581 are currently recruiting with 84, 93 and 18 planned number of patients. Conclusion Regimens containing vorinostat have shown an ORR up to 100% in NDMM patients. HDAC inhibitors have also shown promising efficacy up to 88% ORR in RRMM population. Majority of the patients developed cytopenias as hematological adverse events. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...