Advertisement

Medical Oncology

, Volume 27, Supplement 1, pp 14–24 | Cite as

Treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: advances in current therapy

  • Shaji KumarEmail author
original paper

Abstract

The past decade has seen incredible progress in the treatment of myeloma as a result of more widespread application of autologous stem cell transplantation and introduction of several new drugs. Hence, the survival of patients with this disease has significantly improved during this period. The treatment approach for patients with myeloma has undergone a paradigm shift as a result of the different choices available for treating the patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. In addition, appreciation of the heterogeneity in the outcome of these patients and the impact of genetics on the prognosis has led to efforts at developing a risk-adapted approach to treatment. This article summarizes the recent advances in the treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma and suggests a treatment algorithm for approaching newly diagnosed myeloma.

Keywords

Multiple myeloma Risk stratification Survival 

Notes

Conflict of interest statement

Clinical trial research support from Celgene, Millennium, Novartis, Bayer and Genzyme. The author has received an honorarium for their participation in this supplement.

References

  1. 1.
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:225–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1860–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma. Blood. 2008;111:2962–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Criteria for diagnosis, staging, risk stratification and response assessment of multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2009;23:3–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brenner H, Gondos A, Pulte D. Recent major improvement in long-term survival of younger patients with multiple myeloma. Blood. 2008;111:2521–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kumar SK, Rajkumar SV, Dispenzieri A, et al. Improved survival in multiple myeloma and the impact of novel therapies. Blood. 2008;111:2516–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rajkumar SV. Treatment of myeloma: cure vs. control. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2008;83:1142–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Landgren O, Kyle RA, Pfeiffer RM, et al. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes multiple myeloma: a prospective study. Blood. 2009;113:5412–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, et al. Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1362–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kyle R, Remstein E, Therneau T, et al. The natural history of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma. Blood. 2005;106:949a. (A3396).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kyle RA, Therneau TM, Rajkumar SV, et al. A long-term study of prognosis of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:564–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dispenzieri A, Kyle RA, Katzmann JA, et al. Immunoglobulin free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma. Blood. 2008;111:785–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Snozek CL, Katzmann JA, Kyle RA, et al. Prognostic value of the serum free light chain ratio in newly diagnosed myeloma: proposed incorporation into the international staging system. Leukemia. 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greipp PR, San Miguel JF, Durie BG, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3412–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fonseca R, Harrington D, Oken MM, et al. Biological and prognostic significance of interphase fluorescence is situ hybridization detection of chromosome 13 abnormalities in multiple myeloma: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study. Cancer Res. 2002;62:715–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stewart AK, Bergsagel PL, Greipp PR, et al. A practical guide to defining high-risk myeloma for clinical trials, patient counseling and choice of therapy. Leukemia. 2007;21:529–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dispenzieri A, Rajkumar SV, Gertz MA, et al. Treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma based on Mayo stratification of myeloma and risk-adapted therapy (mSMART): consensus statement. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82:323–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Attal M, Harousseau JL, Stoppa AM, et al. A prospective, randomized trial of autologous bone marrow transplantation and chemotherapy in multiple myeloma. Intergroupe Francais du Myelome. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:91–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Child JA, Morgan GJ, Davies FE, et al. High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem-cell rescue for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1875–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fermand JP, Ravaud P, Chevret S, et al. High-dose therapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: up-front or rescue treatment? Results of a multicenter sequential randomized clinical trial. Blood. 1998;92:3131–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kumar S, Lacy M, Dispenzieri A, et al. Autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma in patients over 70 years: a matched comparison with patients under 65 years. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2005;106:1173.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, et al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2006;20:1467–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kumar S, Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A, et al. High-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma poorly responsive to initial therapy. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004;34:161–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rajkumar SV, Hayman S, Gertz MA, et al. Combination therapy with thalidomide plus dexamethasone for newly diagnosed myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:4319–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rajkumar SV, Blood E, Vesole DH, Fonseca R, Greipp PR. Phase III clinical trial of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with dexamethasone alone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a clinical trial coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:431–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rajkumar SV, Rosinol L, Hussein M, et al. Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2171–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cavo M, Zamagni E, Tosi P, et al. Superiority of thalidomide and dexamethasone over vincristine-doxorubicindexamethasone (VAD) as primary therapy in preparation for autologous transplantation for multiple myeloma. Blood. 2005;106:35–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Macro M, Divine M, Uzunhan Y, et al. Dexamethasone + Thalidomide (Dex/Thal) compared to VAD as a pre-transplant treatment in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (mm): a randomized trial. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2006;108:57.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lacy MQ, Gertz MA, Dispenzieri A, et al. Long-term results of response to therapy, time to progression, and survival with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in newly diagnosed myeloma. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2007;82:1179–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zonder JA, Crowley J, Hussein MA, et al. Superiority of lenalidomide (Len) plus high-dose dexamethasone (HD) compared to HD alone as treatment of newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM): results of the randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled SWOG trial S0232. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2007;110:77.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rajkumar SV, Jacobus S, Callander N, et al. Phase III trial of lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (E4A03): a trial coordinated by the eastern cooperative oncology group. J Clin Oncol 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Abstracts 2007;25 (18S):LBA8025.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kumar S, Hayman SR, Buadi FK, et al. Phase II trial of lenalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (CRd) for newly diagnosed myeloma. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2007;110:190.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jagannath S, Durie BG, Wolf J, et al. Bortezomib therapy alone and in combination with dexamethasone for previously untreated symptomatic multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2005;129:776–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Harousseau JL, Mathiot C, Attal M, et al. VELCADE/dexamethasone (Vel/D) versus VAD as induction treatment prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM): updated results of the IFM 2005/01 trial. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2007;110:450.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cavo M, Tacchetti P, Patriarca F, et al. Superior complete response rate and progression-free survival after autologous transplantation with up-front velcade-thalidomide-dexamethasone compared with thalidomide-dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2008;112:158.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Richardson P, Lonial S, Jakubowiak A, et al. Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: encouraging efficacy in high risk groups with updated results of a phase I/II study. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2008;112:92.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kumar S, Flinn IW, Noga SJ, et al. Safety and efficacy of novel combination therapy with bortezomib, dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, and lenalidomide in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: initial results from the Phase I/II Multi-Center EVOLUTION Study. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2008;112:93.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Blade J, Rosinol L, Sureda A, Fermand JP, Katsahian S, Divine M, et al. High-dose therapy and autologous blood stem-cell transplantation compared with conventional treatment in myeloma patients aged 55 to 65 years: long-term results of a randomized control trial from the Group Myelome-Autogreffe. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:9227–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Barlogie B, Kyle RA, Anderson KC, et al. Standard chemotherapy compared with high-dose chemoradiotherapy for multiple myeloma: final results of Phase III US Intergroup Trial S9321. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:929–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Blade J, Rosinol L, Sureda A, et al. High-dose therapy intensification compared with continued standard chemotherapy in multiple myeloma patients responding to the initial chemotherapy: long-term results from a prospective randomized trial from the Spanish cooperative group PETHEMA. Blood. 2005;106:3755–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Palumbo A, Bringhen S, Petrucci MT, et al. Intermediate-dose melphalan improves survival of myeloma patients aged 50 to 70: results of a randomized controlled trial. Blood. 2004;15:3052–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rajkumar SV, Jacobus S, Callander N, et al. A randomized trial of lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (RD) versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (E4A03): a trial coordinated by the eastern cooperative oncology group. ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts. 2008;112:74.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kumar S, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, et al. Impact of lenalidomide therapy on stem cell mobilization and engraftment post-peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Leukemia. 2007.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lonial S, Kaufman J, Torre C, et al. A randomized phase I trial of melphalan + bortezomib as conditioning for autologous transplant for myeloma: the effect of sequence of administration. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2008;112:3332.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Giralt S, Bensinger W, Goodman M, et al. 166Ho-DOTMP plus melphalan followed by peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma: results of two phase 1/2 trials. Blood. 2003;102:2684–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Attal M, Harousseau JL, Facon T, et al. Single versus double autologous stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2495–502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cavo M, Tosi P, Zamagni E, et al. Prospective, randomized study of single compared with double autologous stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma: Bologna 96 clinical study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2434–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fermand JP, Alberti C, Marolleau JP. Single versus tandem high dose therapy (HDT) supported with autologous blood stem cell (ABSC) transplantation using unselected or CD34-enriched ABSC: results of a two by two designed randomized trial in 230 young patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Hematol J. 2003;4(Suppl 1):S59.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Attal M, Harousseau J-L, Leyvraz S, et al. Maintenance therapy with thalidomide improves survival in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood. 2006;108:3289–94. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-05-022962.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bjorkstrand BB, Ljungman P, Svensson H, et al. Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation versus autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: a retrospective case-matched study from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Blood. 1996;88:4711–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Garban F, Attal M, Michallet M, et al. Prospective comparison of autologous stem cell transplantation followed by dose-reduced allograft (IFM99–03 trial) with tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (IFM99–04 trial) in high-risk de novo multiple myeloma. Blood. 2006;107:3474–80. doi: 10.1182/blood-2005-09-3869.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bruno B, Rotta M, Patriarca F, et al. A comparison of allografting with autografting for newly diagnosed myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1110–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Myeloma Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Combination chemotherapy versus melphalan plus prednisone as treatment for multiple myeloma: an overview of 6, 633 patients from 27 randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:3832–42.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Palumbo A, Bringhen S, Caravita T, et al. Oral melphalan and prednisone chemotherapy plus thalidomide compared with melphalan and prednisone alone in elderly patients with multiple myeloma: randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2006;367:825–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Facon T, Mary JY, Hulin C, et al. Randomized clinical trial comparing melphalan-prednisone (MP), MP-Thalidomide (MP-THAL) and high-dose therapy using melphalan 100 MG/M² (MEL100) for newly diagnosed myeloma patients aged 65–75 years. Interim analysis of the IFM 99-06 trial on 350 patients. Blood. 2004;104:63a (A206).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    San Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al. Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:906–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Palumbo A, Bringhen S, Rossi D, et al. A prospective, randomized, phase iii study of bortezomib, melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide (vmpt) versus bortezomib, melphalan and prednisone (vmp) in elderly newly diagnosed myeloma patients. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2008;112:652.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Palumbo A, Falco P, Corradini P, et al. Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide treatment for newly diagnosed myeloma: a report from the GIMEMA Italian Multiple Myeloma Network. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:4459–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A, Gertz MA, et al. Mayo clinic consensus statement for the use of bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2006;81:1047–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kyle RA, Yee GC, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 clinical practice guideline update on the role of bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2464–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Knight R, DeLap RJ, Zeldis JB. Lenalidomide and venous thrombosis in multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:2079–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pillon L, Sweeting RS, Arora A, et al. Approach to acute renal failure in biopsy proven myeloma cast nephropathy: is there still a role for plasmapheresis? Kidney Int. 2008;74:956–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Alyea E, Weller E, Schlossman R, et al. Outcome after autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation for patients with multiple myeloma: impact of graft-versus-myeloma effect. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2003;32:1145–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Arora M, McGlave PB, Burns LJ, et al. Results of autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant therapy for multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2005;35:1133–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Kuruvilla J, Shepherd JD, Sutherland HJ, et al. Long-term outcome of myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007;13:925–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Hulin C, Facon T, Rodon P, et al. Efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: IFM 01/01 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3664–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Waage A, Gimsing P, Juliusson G, et al. Melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide to newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma: a placebo controlled randomised phase 3 trial. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2007;110:78.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Wijermans P, Schaafsma M, van Norden Y, et al. Melphalan + prednisone versus melphalan + prednisone + thalidomide in induction therapy for multiple myeloma in elderly patients: final analysis of the Dutch Cooperative Group HOVON 49 Study. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts). 2008;112:649.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations