The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
Samer Tabchi , Ranjit Nair , Krina K. Patel , Hans Chulhee Lee , Sheeba K. Thomas , Behrang Amini , Sairah Ahmed , Rohtesh S. Mehta , Qaiser Bashir , Muzaffar H. Qazilbash , Donna M. Weber , Robert Z. Orlowski , Raymond Alexanian , Lei Feng , Elisabet Esteve Manasanch
Background: MM follows a clinical course leading to refractoriness and limited treatment options in RRMM. Aggressive NDMM needs rapid cytoreduction for disease control, which may not be possible with standard novel therapies. We report on a highly effective therapy that offers a salvage option for these patients. Methods: We searched our medical database for MM patients who received mCBAD from 2010-2016 – 28 day cycle of cyclophosphamide 350 mg/m2 IV twice daily + mesna 400mg/m2 IV daily (days 1-4), bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 SQ (days 1, 4, 8, 11), doxorubicin 9 mg/m2 IV (days 1-4) , dexamethasone 40 mg PO daily (days 1-4, 9-12, 17-20). IMWG criteria were used for response assessment. Descriptive statistics, Fisher’s exact test, Chi-square, Wilcoxon rank sum, and Kaplan-Meier were used for statistical purposes. Results: 80 patients met the inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics, response, adverse events, PFS/OS are summarized in Table 1. Median follow-up for the censored observations was 21.3 months (1.35 – 69.22). Conclusions: mCBAD offers excellent response rates (ORR > 90%) and favorable PFS/OS in highly refractory high risk MM. It is also an excellent salvage regimen with about half of patients undergoing subsequent transplant. Patient selection is required due high treatment related mortality.
NDMM (n = 15) | RRMM (n = 65) | |
---|---|---|
Age, median (range) | 56 (36 -74) | 65 (22 -75) |
ISS, n(%) | ||
I | 1 (7.1) | 15 (24.6) |
II | 1 (7.1) | 15 (24.6) |
III | 12 (85.7) | 31 (50.8) |
FISH, n(%) | ||
t(4:14) | 2 (14.3) | 6 (9.5) |
t(14;16) | 0 | 2 (3.2) |
deletion 17p | 2 (14.3) | 21 (33.3) |
# cycles received, (%) | ||
≤2 | 80% | 80% |
≥3 | 20% | 20% |
# prior therapies, median (range) | 0 | 2 (1 - 7) |
Prior ASCT, n (%) | 0 | 24 (36.9) |
ORR^, n (%) | 15 (100) | 54 (91.5) |
CR | 3 (20) | 4 (6.8) |
VGPR | 4 (26.7) | 13 (22) |
PR | 8 (53.3) | 37 (62.7) |
PD | 0 | 5 (8.5) |
Adverse events*, n(%) | ||
Neuropathy | 3 (20) | 20 (31) |
Febrile neutropenia | 2 (13.3) | 18 (27.7) |
Infection | 5 (33.3) | 26 (40.6) |
Mortality | 0 | 8 (16%) |
PFS, mo (95% CI) | 19.6 (10.3 - NR) | 6 (3.9- 7.2) |
PFS (followed by ASCT) | N/A | 8.95 (6.9-15.9) (n = 28) |
PFS (not followed by ASCT) | N/A | 3.2 (2.2 - 4.2) (n = 34) |
OS mo (95% CI) | 35.4 (18.1 - NR) | 15.8 (9.3 - 23) |
*related to treatment, ^ best response - 59 evaluable RRMM, ASCT = autologous transplant
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2021 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Xavier Leleu
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Cyrille Touzeau
2021 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Robert M. Rifkin
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Andrew Spencer