Clinica di Ematologia

Ancona, Italy

Clinica di Ematologia

Ancona, Italy

Time filter

Source Type

Gozzetti A.,Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese | Cerase A.,Unit NINT Neuroimaging and Neurointervention | Rossi D.,University of Piemonte Orientale | Palumbo A.,University of Turin | And 9 more authors.
Cancer | Year: 2012

BACKGROUND: Intracranial involvement in multiple myeloma is extremely rare. The effect of new drugs (eg, thalidomide, bortezomib, lenalidomide) with respect to old drugs (eg, alkylators, steroids) has not been reported. METHODS: We collected clinical and biological data of patients presenting with an osteo-dural or primary dural multiple myeloma (OD-DMM) or a central nervous system myelomatosis (CNS-MM) by sending a questionnaire to the centers of the Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell'Adulto (GIMEMA). RESULTS: A total of 50 patients were registered. New therapies were used in 35 patients, whereas 15 patients received old treatments. Twenty-five out of 50 patients obtained a complete remission or a very good partial remission (CR+VGPR). Overall survival (OS) for CNS-MM was 6 months, for OD-DMM 25 months. OS was 25 months for patients treated with new agents versus 8 months with old agents. Improved OS and progression-free survival were predicted by response (CR+VGPR) and by patients who underwent stem cell transplantation versus chemotherapy. β2-Microglobulin >5 mmol/L was a poor prognostic factor. Multivariate analysis showed poor survival for patients with β2-microglobulin >5 mmol/L and better survival for patients achieving CR+VGPR. CONCLUSIONS: The overall data highlight the relevance of therapy with new drugs in intracranial myeloma, providing a framework for future clinical trials. © 2011 American Cancer Society.

Palumbo A.,University of Turin | Cavallo F.,University of Turin | Gay F.,University of Turin | Di Raimondo F.,University of Catania | And 22 more authors.
New England Journal of Medicine | Year: 2014

Background: This open-label, randomized, phase 3 study compared melphalan at a dose of 200 mg per square meter of body-surface area plus autologous stem-cell transplantation with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) and compared lenalidomide maintenance therapy with no maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Methods: We randomly assigned 273 patients 65 years of age or younger to high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation or MPR consolidation therapy after induction, and 251 patients to lenalidomide maintenance therapy or no maintenance therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Results: The median follow-up period was 51.2 months. Both progression-free and overall survival were significantly longer with high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation than with MPR (median progression-free survival, 43.0 months vs. 22.4 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32 to 0.61; P<0.001; and 4-year overall survival, 81.6% vs. 65.3%; hazard ratio for death, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.93; P = 0.02). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide maintenance than with no maintenance (41.9 months vs. 21.6 months; hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.65; P<0.001), but 3-year overall survival was not significantly prolonged (88.0% vs. 79.2%; hazard ratio for death, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.36 to 1.15; P = 0.14). Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was significantly more frequent with high-dose melphalan than with MPR (94.3% vs. 51.5%), as were gastrointestinal adverse events (18.4% vs. 0%) and infections (16.3% vs. 0.8%); neutropenia and dermatologic toxic effects were more frequent with lenalidomide maintenance than with no maintenance (23.3% vs. 0% and 4.3% vs. 0%, respectively). Conclusions: Consolidation therapy with high-dose melphalan plus stem-cell transplantation, as compared with MPR, significantly prolonged progression-free and overall survival among patients with multiple myeloma who were 65 years of age or younger. Lenalidomide maintenance, as compared with no maintenance, significantly prolonged progression-free survival. Copyright © 2014 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Bringhen S.,Myeloma Unit | Petrucci M.T.,University of Rome La Sapienza | Larocca A.,Myeloma Unit | Conticello C.,Ospedale Ferrarotto | And 16 more authors.
Blood | Year: 2014

This multicenter, open-label phase 2 trial determined the safety and efficacy of carfilzomib, a novel and irreversible proteasome inhibitor, in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (CCyd) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) ≥65 years of age or who were ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation. Patients (N 5 58) received CCyd for up to 9 28-day cycles, followed by maintenance with carfilzomib until progression or intolerance. After a median of 9 CCyd induction cycles (range 1-9), 95% of patients achieved at least a partial response, 71% achieved at least a very good partial response, 49% achieved at least a near complete response, and 20% achieved stringent complete response. After a median follow-up of 18 months, the 2-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 76% and 87%, respectively. The most frequent grade 3 to 5 toxicities were neutropenia (20%), anemia (11%), and cardiopulmonary adverse events (7%). Peripheral neuropathy was limited to grades 1 and 2 (9%). Fourteen percent of patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events, and 21% of patients required carfilzomib dose reductions. In summary, results showed high complete response rates and a good safety profile. This trial was registered at as #NCT01346787. © 2014 by The American Society of Hematology.

Palumbo A.,Myeloma Unit | Bringhen S.,Myeloma Unit | Mateos M.-V.,University of Salamanca | Larocca A.,Myeloma Unit | And 23 more authors.
Blood | Year: 2015

We conducted a pooled analysis of 869 individual newly diagnosed elderly patient data from 3 prospective trials. At diagnosis, a geriatric assessment had been performed. An additive scoring system (range 0-5), based on age, comorbidities, and cognitive and physical conditions, was developed to identify 3 groups: fit (score = 0, 39%), intermediate fitness (score = 1,31%), and frail (score ≥2, 30%). The 3-year overall survivalwas 84%in fit, 76% in intermediate-fitness (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; P = .042), and 57% in frail (HR, 3.57; P < .001) patients. Thecumulative incidence of grade ≥3 nonhematologic adverse events at 12 months was 22.2%in fit, 26.4%in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.23; P = .217), and 34.0%in frail (HR, 1.74; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of treatment discontinuation at 12months was 16.5%in fit, 20.8%in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.41; P = .052), and 31.2% in frail (HR, 2.21; P < .001) patients. Our frailty score predicts mortality and the risk of toxicity in elderly myeloma patients. The International Myeloma Working group proposes this score for the measurement of frailty in designing future clinical trials. These trials are registered at as #NCT01093136 (EMN01), #NCT01190787 (26866138MMY2069), and #NCT01346787 (IST-CAR-506).

Dimopoulos M.A.,National and Kapodistrian University of Athens | Moreau P.,University of Nantes | Palumbo A.,University of Turin | Joshua D.,Royal Prince Alfred Hospital | And 27 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2016

Background: Bortezomib with dexamethasone is a standard treatment option for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib with dexamethasone has shown promising activity in patients in this disease setting. The aim of this study was to compare the combination of carfilzomib and dexamethasone with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Methods: In this randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre study, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had one to three previous treatments were randomly assigned (1:1) using a blocked randomisation scheme (block size of four) to receive carfilzomib with dexamethasone (carfilzomib group) or bortezomib with dexamethasone (bortezomib group). Randomisation was stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, previous lines of treatment, International Staging System stage, and planned route of bortezomib administration if randomly assigned to bortezomib with dexamethasone. Patients received treatment until progression with carfilzomib (20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1; 56 mg/m2 thereafter; 30 min intravenous infusion) and dexamethasone (20 mg oral or intravenous infusion) or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2; intravenous bolus or subcutaneous injection) and dexamethasone (20 mg oral or intravenous infusion). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. The study is ongoing but not enrolling participants; results for the interim analysis of the primary endpoint are presented. The trial is registered at, number NCT01568866. Findings: Between June 20, 2012, and June 30, 2014, 929 patients were randomly assigned (464 to the carfilzomib group; 465 to the bortezomib group). Median follow-up was 11·9 months (IQR 9·3-16·1) in the carfilzomib group and 11·1 months (8·2-14·3) in the bortezomib group. Median progression-free survival was 18·7 months (95% CI 15·6-not estimable) in the carfilzomib group versus 9·4 months (8·4-10·4) in the bortezomib group at a preplanned interim analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53 [95% CI 0·44-0·65]; p<0·0001). On-study death due to adverse events occurred in 18 (4%) of 464 patients in the carfilzomib group and in 16 (3%) of 465 patients in the bortezomib group. Serious adverse events were reported in 224 (48%) of 463 patients in the carfilzomib group and in 162 (36%) of 456 patients in the bortezomib group. The most frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events were anaemia (67 [14%] of 463 patients in the carfilzomib group vs 45 [10%] of 456 patients in the bortezomib group), hypertension (41 [9%] vs 12 [3%]), thrombocytopenia (39 [8%] vs 43 [9%]), and pneumonia (32 [7%] vs 36 [8%]). Interpretation: For patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, carfilzomib with dexamethasone could be considered in cases in which bortezomib with dexamethasone is a potential treatment option. Funding: Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an Amgen subsidiary. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd.

Cavo M.,University of Bologna | Tacchetti P.,University of Bologna | Patriarca F.,University of Rome La Sapienza | Petrucci M.T.,University of Rome La Sapienza | And 17 more authors.
The Lancet | Year: 2010

Background Thalidomide plus dexamethasone (TD) is a standard induction therapy for myeloma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of addition of bortezomib to TD (VTD) versus TD alone as induction therapy before, and consolidation therapy after, double autologous stem-cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Methods Patients (aged 18-65 years) with previously untreated symptomatic myeloma were enrolled from 73 sites in Italy between May, 2006, and April, 2008, and data collection continued until June 30, 2010. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) by a web-based system to receive three 21-day cycles of thalidomide (100 mg daily for the first 14 days and 200 mg daily thereafter) plus dexamethasone (40 mg daily on 8 of the first 12 days, but not consecutively; total of 320 mg per cycle), either alone or with bortezomib (1•3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11). The randomisation sequence was computer generated by the study coordinating team and was stratified by disease stage. After double autologous stem-cell transplantation, patients received two 35-day cycles of their assigned drug regimen, VTD or TD, as consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was the rate of complete or near complete response to induction therapy. Analysis was by intention to treat. Patients and treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. This study is still underway but is not recruiting participants, and is registered with, number NCT01134484, and with EudraCT, number 2005-003723-39. Findings 480 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive VTD (n=241 patients) or TD (n=239). Six patients withdrew consent before start of treatment, and 236 on VTD and 238 on TD were included in the intentionto- treat analysis. After induction therapy, complete or near complete response was achieved in 73 patients (31%, 95% CI 25•0-36•8) receiving VTD, and 27 (11%, 7•3-15•4) on TD (p<0•0001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded in a significantly higher number of patients on VTD (n=132, 56%) than in those on TD (n=79, 33%; p<0•0001), with a higher occurrence of peripheral neuropathy in patients on VTD (n=23, 10%) than in those on TD (n=5, 2%; p=0•0004). Resolution or improvement of severe peripheral neuropathy was recorded in 18 of 23 patients on VTD, and in three of five patients on TD. Interpretation VTD induction therapy before double autologous stem-cell transplantation significantly improves rate of complete or near complete response, and represents a new standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma who are eligible for transplant. Funding Seràgnoli Institute of Haematology at the University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd.

Palumbo A.,University of Turin | Bringhen S.,University of Turin | Kumar S.K.,Rochester College | Lupparelli G.,University of Turin | And 23 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2014

Background: Lenalidomide has been linked to second primary malignancies in myeloma. We aimed to pool and analyse available data to compare the incidence of second primary malignancies in patients with and without lenalidomide exposure. Methods: We identified relevant studies through a search of PubMed and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, and the International Myeloma Workshop. Randomised, controlled, phase 3 trials that recruited patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma between Jan 1, 2000, and Dec 15, 2012, and in which at least one group received lenalidomide were eligible for inclusion. We obtained individual patient data (age, sex, date of diagnosis, allocated treatment and received treatment, duration of treatment and cause of discontinuation, maintenance treatment, date of first relapse, date of second primary malignancy diagnosis, type of second primary malignancy, date of death or last contact, and cause of death) by direct collaboration with the principal investigators of eligible trials. Primary outcomes of interest were cumulative incidence of all second primary malignancies, solid second primary malignancies, and haematological second primary malignancies, and were analysed by a one-step meta-analysis. Findings: We found nine eligible trials, of which seven had available data for 3254 patients. 3218 of these patients received treatment (2620 had received lenalidomide and 598 had not), and were included in our analyses. Cumulative incidences of all second primary malignancies at 5 years were 6·9% (95% CI 5·3-8·5) in patients who received lenalidomide and 4·8% (2·0-7·6) in those who did not (hazard ratio [HR] 1·55 [95% CI 1·03-2·34]; p=0·037). Cumulative 5-year incidences of solid second primary malignancies were 3·8% (95% CI 2·7-4·9) in patients who received lenalidomide and 3·4% (1·6-5·2) in those that did not (HR 1·1 [95% CI 0·62-2·00]; p=0·72), and of haematological second primary malignancies were 3·1% (95% CI 1·9-4·3) and 1·4% (0·0-3·6), respectively (HR 3·8 [95% CI 1·15-12·62]; p=0·029). Exposure to lenalidomide plus oral melphalan significantly increased haematological second primary malignancy risk versus melphalan alone (HR 4·86 [95% CI 2·79-8·46]; p<0·0001). Exposure to lenalidomide plus cyclophosphamide (HR 1·26 [95% CI 0·30-5·38]; p=0·75) or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (HR 0·86 [95% CI 0·33-2·24]; p=0·76) did not increase haematological second primary malignancy risk versus melphalan alone. Interpretation: Patients with newly diagnosed myeloma who received lenalidomide had an increased risk of developing haematological second primary malignancies, driven mainly by treatment strategies that included a combination of lenalidomide and oral melphalan. These results suggest that alternatives, such as cyclophosphamide or alkylating-free combinations, should be considered instead of oral melphalan in combination with lenalidomide for myeloma. Funding: Celgene Corporation. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

Palumbo A.,University of Turin | Offidani M.,Clinica di Ematologia | Patriarca F.,University of Udine | Petrucci M.T.,University of Rome La Sapienza | Cavo M.,University of Bologna
Leukemia and Lymphoma | Year: 2015

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy characterized by abnormal growth and/or dysregulation of plasma cells leading to the build-up of malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow and increased production of monoclonal immunoglobulins. Treatment modalities for MM include autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), chemotherapy with conventional and immunomodulatory agents, radiation therapy and adjunct therapies. Bendamustine is a synthetic chemotherapeutic agent combining the alkylating properties of a mustard group with the activities of a benzimidazole ring, giving it a unique alkylating activity compared with other alkylating agents. Bendamustine has proven activity in both newly diagnosed and relapsed-refractory MM. Bendamustine has also demonstrated activity in MM after relapse from ASCT, and has recently been used successfully as a conditioning regimen for ASCT in combination with melphalan. Bendamustine is generally well tolerated, with the majority of adverse events being due to bone marrow suppression. Extramedullary toxicity is infrequent and usually mild. © 2014 Informa UK, Ltd.

Gay F.,University of Turin | Larocca A.,University of Turin | Wijermans P.,Haga Hospital | Cavallo F.,University of Turin | And 18 more authors.
Blood | Year: 2011

Complete response (CR) was an uncommon event in elderly myeloma patients until novel agents were combined with standard oral melphalan-prednisone. This analysis assesses the impact of treatment response on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We retrospectively analyzed 1175 newly diagnosed myeloma patients, enrolled in 3 multicenter trials, treated with melphalanprednisone alone (n = 332), melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (n = 332), melphalanprednisone-bortezomib (n = 257), or melphalan-prednisone-bortezomib- thalidomide (n = 254). After a median follow-up of 29 months, the 3-year PFS andOSwere 67% and 27% (hazard ratio = 0.16; P < .001), and 91% and 70% (hazard ratio = 0.15; P < .001) in patients who obtained CR and in those who achieved very good partial response, respectively. Similar results were observed in patients older than 75 years. Multivariate analysis confirmed that the achievement of CR was an independent predictor of longer PFS and OS, regardless of age, International Staging System stage, and treatment. These findings highlight a significant association between the achievement of CR and long-term outcome, and support the use of novel agents to achieve maximal response in elderly patients, including those more than 75 years. This trial was registered at as #NCT00232934, #ISRCTN 90692740, and #NCT01063179. © 2011 by The American Society of Hematology.

Offidani M.,Clinica di Ematologia | Corvatta L.,UOC Medicina | Caraffa P.,Clinica di Ematologia | Leoni P.,Clinica di Ematologia | And 3 more authors.
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy | Year: 2014

Despite the improvements thanks to the introduction of proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), nearly all myeloma patients eventually become refractory to these drugs. Consequently, the outcome of these patients is very poor. Pomalidomide is a new IMiD with a similar structure to the commonly used IMiD thalidomide and lenalidomide. Pomalidomide exhibited more potent anti-myeloma activity and a similar favorable safety profile compared with thalidomide and lenalidomide. In Phase I-II studies pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone demonstrated activity in myeloma patients refractory to both bortezomib and IMiDs. Based on the results of a Phase III trial, the FDA and EMA agencies granted accelerated approval to pomalidomide, which is now considered a new effective strategy for relapsed and/or refractory myeloma patients. Very promising results were obtained when pomalidomide-dexamethasone was used in combination with other compounds. This review provides updated information about pharmacokinetics, mechanism of action, resistance, clinical efficacy and safety of pomalidomide. © 2014 Informa GBR, Ltd.

Loading Clinica di Ematologia collaborators
Loading Clinica di Ematologia collaborators