Treatment of Bendamustine and Prednisone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma results in superior complete response rate, prolonged time to treatment failure and improved quality of life compared to treatment with Melphalan and Prednisone—a randomized phase III study of the East German Study Group of Hematology and Oncology (OSHO)
- 1.4k Downloads
Purpose: This randomized phase III study compared bendamustine and prednisone (BP) to standard melphalan and prednisone (MP) treatment in previously untreated patients with multiple Myeloma (MM). Patients and Methods: To be included, patients had to have histologically and cytologically proven stage II with progressive diseases or stage III MM. They were randomly assigned to receive BP (n=68) or MP (n=63). The primary endpoint was the time to treatment failure (TTF). Secondary endpoints included survival, remission rate, toxicity and quality of life. Results: The overall response rate was 75% in the BP and 70% in the MP group. A significantly higher number of patients treated with BP achieved a complete remission than did patients receiving MP (32 vs. 13%; P=0.007), and the maximum response was achieved more rapidly in patients treated with BP compared to those receiving MP (6.8 vs. 8.7 cycles; P<0.02). TTF and remission duration were significantly longer in the BP group. Patients receiving BP had higher QoL scores and reported pain less frequently than patients receiving MP. Conclusion: BP is superior to MP with respect to complete remission rate, TTF, cycles needed to achieve maximum remission and quality of life and should be considered the new standard in first-line treatment of MM patients not eligible for transplantation.
KeywordsBendamustine Prednisone Multiple myeloma Melphalan Prednisone
The authors wish to thank Barbara Hobbie for manuscript preparation, and all physicians, nurses, and support personnel for their care of patients on this study.
- Anger G, Hesse P, Baufeld H (1969) Treatment of multiple myeloma with a new cytostatic agent: gamma-l-methyl-5-bis-(beta-chlorethyl)-amino-benzimidazolyl-(2)-butyric acid hydrochloride. DMW 94(48):2495–2500Google Scholar
- Anger G, Fink R, Fleischer J, Hesse P, Krug K, Raderecht C et al (1975) Vergleichsuntersuchungen zwischen Cytostasan und Cyclophosphamid bei der chronischen Lymphadenose, dem Plasmozytom, der Lymphogranulomatose und dem Bronchialkarzinom. Dt Gesundh -Wesen 30(27):1280–1285Google Scholar
- Bergsagel DE, Sprague CC, Austin C, Griffith KM (1962) Evaluation of new chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of multiple myeloma. IV. L-Phenylalanine mustard (NSC-8806). Cancer Chemother Rep 21(87):99Google Scholar
- Blade J, Samson D, Reece D, Apperley J, Bjorkstrand B, Gahrton G et al (1998) Criteria for evaluating disease response and progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of the EBMT. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant. Br J Haematology 102(5):1115–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Blumenstengel K, Ruffert K, Frincke HJ, Kath R, Höffken K (1998) Bendamustine vs. Melphalan in the primary treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). A randomized prospective study. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 124:68Google Scholar
- Gahrton G, Svensson H, Cavo M, Apperley J, Bacigalupo A, Bjorkstrand B et al (2001) Progress in allogenic bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: a comparison between transplants performed 1983–1993 and 1994–1998 at European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation centres. Br J Haematol 113(1):209–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Harousseau J-L, Attal M, Divine M, Marit G, Leblond V, Stoppa A-M et al (1995) Autologous stem cell transplantation after first remission induction treatment in multiple myeloma: a report of the French Registry on autologous transplantation in multiple myeloma. Blood 85(11):3077–3085PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Leoni LM, Bailey B, Reifert J, Niemeyer C, Bendall H, Dauffenbach L et al (2003) SDX-105 (Bendamustine), a clinically active antineoplastic agent posesses a unique mechanism of action. Blood 102(11):640aGoogle Scholar
- Myeloma Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998) Combination chemotherapy versus melphalan plus prednisone as treatment for multiple myeloma: an overview of 6,633 patients from 27 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 16(12):3832–3842Google Scholar
- Peest D, Deicher H, Coldewey R, Leo R, Bartl R, Bartels H et al (1995) A comparison of polychemotherapy and melphalan/prednisone for primary remission induction, and interferon-alpha for maintenance treatment, in multiple myeloma. A prospective trial of the German Myeloma Treatment Group. Eur J Cancer 31A(2):146–151PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Raaijmakers HGP, Izquierdo MAI, Lokhorst HM, de Leeuw C, Belien JAM, Bloem AC et al (1998) Lung-resistance-related protein expression is a negative predictive factor for response to conventional low but not to intensified dose alkylating chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. Blood 91(3):1029–1036PubMedGoogle Scholar