Key Points• In a multicenter, randomized phase 3 trial, MPR-R was not superior over MPT-T with respect to response rate, PFS, and OS.• Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity requiring growth factor support occurred with MPR-R vs clinically significant neuropathy with MPT-T.The combination of melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) is considered standard therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Long-term treatment with thalidomide is hampered by neurotoxicity. Melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide, followed by lenalidomide maintenance therapy, showed promising results without severe neuropathy emerging. We randomly assigned 668 patients between nine 4-week cycles of MPT followed by thalidomide maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (MPT-T) and the same MP regimen with thalidomide being replaced by lenalidomide (MPR-R). This multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 trial was undertaken by Dutch-Belgium Cooperative Trial Group for Hematology Oncology and the Nordic Myeloma Study Group (the HOVON87/ NMSG18 trial). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 318 patients were randomly assigned to receive MPT-T, and 319 received MPR-R. After a median follow-up of 36 months, PFS with MPT-T was 20 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 18-23 months) vs 23 months (95% CI, 19-27 months) with MPR-R (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.72-1.04; P 5 .12). Response rates were similar, with at least a very good partial response of 47% and 45%, respectively. Hematologic toxicity was more pronounced with MPR-R, especially grades 3 and 4 neutropenia: 64% vs 27%. Neuropathy of at least grade 3 was significantly higher in the MPT-T arm: 16% vs 2% in MPR-R, resulting in a significant shorter duration of maintenance therapy (5 vs 17 months in MPR-R), irrespective of age. MPR-R has no advantage over MPT-T concerning efficacy. The toxicity profile differed with clinically significant neuropathy during thalidomide maintenance vs myelosuppression with

It is unknown whether imatinib prior to myeloablative haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) increases transplant-related toxicity. Among the side effects induced by imatinib, myelosuppression and liver injury might worsen HSCT outcomes. We retrospectively analysed engraftment, liver toxicity, acute graft-versushost disease (aGVHD) incidence and 100-day mortality in 30 patients with BCR/ABL-positive leukaemias who received imatinib before HSCT and compared results of 48 age-matched controls who did not receive preceding imatinib. Both neutrophil and platelet engraftment occurred more rapidly among imatinib patients but the differences adjusted for Gratwohl scale were not statistically significant (P ¼ 0.18 and 0.22, respectively). The adjusted hazards of having liver function tests (LFTs) 41.5 normal increased and the adjusted durations of elevated LFTs were not significantly different. The estimated adjusted difference in mean peak bilirubin values was also not significantly different (P ¼ 0.48). However, the adjusted hazard of increased creatinine 41.5 normal was significantly higher in the imatinib group (HR ¼ 4.09, P ¼ 0.02). The adjusted odds of grades II-IV aGVHD were similar in both groups (OR ¼ 0.86, P ¼ 0.78), and while the adjusted odds of 100-day mortality were lower among imatinib patients, the difference was not significant (OR ¼ 0.65, P ¼ 0.60). These data do not provide any evidence that imatinib preceding HSCT increases acute transplant-related toxicities.

Health-related quality of life in transplant ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with either thalidomide or lenalidomide-based regimen until progression: a prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 study

No abstract

No abstract