34
Starting Therapy for Low Risk Myeloma Robert Z. Orlowski, Ph.D., M.D. Director, Myeloma Section Professor, Departments of Lymphoma/Myeloma & Experimental Therapeutics Principal Investigator, M. D. Anderson SPORE in Multiple Myeloma Chair, Southwest Oncology Group Myeloma Committee

Starting Therapy for Low Risk Myeloma

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Starting Therapy for Low Risk Myeloma. Robert Z. Orlowski, Ph.D., M.D. Director, Myeloma Section Professor, Departments of Lymphoma/Myeloma & Experimental Therapeutics Principal Investigator, M. D. Anderson SPORE in Multiple Myeloma Chair, Southwest Oncology Group Myeloma Committee. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Starting Therapy for Low Risk Myeloma

Robert Z. Orlowski, Ph.D., M.D.Director, Myeloma Section

Professor, Departments of Lymphoma/Myeloma & Experimental Therapeutics

Principal Investigator, M. D. Anderson SPORE in Multiple Myeloma

Chair, Southwest Oncology Group Myeloma Committee

Defining Risk : ISS Stage

Stage 2m Albumin N Median Survival (mos.)

P value

I <3.5 ≥3.5 2401 62 <0.0001

II <3.5

≥3.5 -<5.5

<3.5 OR 3278 44 <0.0001

III ≥5.5 2770 29 <0.0001

Greipp, PR et al. J Clin Oncol 23:3412, 2005.

Greipp, PR et al. J. Clin. Oncol. 23:3412, 2005.

ISS and Prognosis

• Significant survival differences for three stages (P < 0.0001)

• Better outcome predictor than the prior Durie-Salmon method

• Still does not incorporate cytogenetics

Molecular Staging : mSMART

http://msmart.org

• Novel agents overcome del 13, t(4;14)

Risk and FISH : t(4;14)

Avet-Loiseau, H et al. Leukemia Epub Oct 3, 2012.

• t(4;14) is a poor risk feature for both OS and PFS even in patients with ISS stage I– Also stage II

and III

OS – t(4;14)

OS + t(4;14)

PFS + t(4;14)

PFS - t(4;14)

FISH Del 17p

Avet-Loiseau, H et al. Leukemia Epub Oct 3, 2012.

OS – del 17

OS + del 17

PFS + del 17

PFS - del 17

• Del 17p is another poor risk feature for both OS and PFS

• t(14;16)

• t(14;20)

Hybrid Systems

t(4;14) or del(17p) & high 2 (n=42)

No del(13), t(4;14), or del(17p) & low 2 (n=155)

del(13) only & low 2 (n=110)

t(4;14) or del(17p) & low 2 (n=63)

del(13) & high 2 (n=69)

No del(13), ct(4;14),

or del(17p)& high 2

(n=74)

Primary Plasma Cell Leukemia

Usmani, SZ et al. Leukemia Epub April 17, 2012.

• Outcomes have improved with novel agents for myeloma

• This has not been the case for PPCL– PFS

– OS

High LDH

Gkotzamanidou, M et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 11:409, 2011.

• High LDH predicts poor survival regardless of ISS stage

Defining Risk : GEP70

Shaughnessy, JD Jr. et al. Blood 109:2276, 2007.

• Expression profiling to identify high-risk patients

• 30% of genes mapped to chr 1

• Independent predictor– HR 5.16, P < 0.001

Useful at Diagnosis and at Relapse

Shaughnessy, JD Jr. et al. Blood 109:2276, 2007.

• GEP70 profiling is useful not just in newly diagnosed patients, but also at relapse

EMC-92

Kuiper, R et al. Leukemia Epub June 22, 2012.

TT2 dataset TT3 dataset

Overlap Between Signatures

Kuiper, R et al. Leukemia Epub June 22, 2012.

• If only a few genes are in common, do they all play a role in myeloma pathobiology, or do only some?

21 overlapping genes

Do They Pass the Sniff Test?• ITPRIP, 10q25.1, Inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate receptor interacting protein (Ca)

• ALDOA, 16p11.2, Aldolase A, fructose-bisphosphate (glycolysis)

• PSMD4, 1q21.3, Proteasome 26S subunit, non-ATPase, 4 (binds Ub-proteins)

• EXOSC4, 8q24.3, Exosome component 4 (RNA processing)

• AURKA, 20q13, Aurora kinase A (cell cycle progression; drugged !)

• ASPM, 1q31.3, Abnormal spindle-like microcephaly-associated protein (Dros.)

• CKS1B, 1q21.2, CDC28 protein kinase regulatory subunit 1B (cell cycle, p27)

• LTBP1, 2p22.3, Latent transforming growth factor beta binding protein 1 (activation of TGF-)

• BIRC5, 17q25.3, Baculoviral IAP repeat containing 5 (apoptosis inhibitor; ?drugged)

• FANC1, 15q26.1, Fanconi anemia, complementation group I (DNA repair)

• ESPL1, 12q13.13, Extra spindle pole bodies homolog 1 (S. cerevisiae)(protease with role in chromosome segregation)

http://www.genecards.org

Sniff Test Part II

http://www.genecards.org

• MCM6, 2q21.3, Minichromosome maintenance complex component 6 (initiation of genome replication)

• NCAPG, 4p15.31, Non-SMC condensin I complex, subunit G (conversion of interphase chromatin into mitotic-like condensed chromosomes)

• SPAG5, 17q11.2, Sperm associated antigen 5 (chromosome segregation)

• ZWINT, 10q21.1, ZW10 interactor (kinetochore formation and spindle checkpoint activity)

• TMEM97, 17q11.2, Transmembrane protein 97 (cholesterol homeostasis)

• MAGEA6, Xq28, Melanoma antigen family A, 6 (? Function; immunotherapy)

• ITM2B, 13q14.2, Integral membrane protein 2B (protease inhibitor)

• CDC2, 10q21.2, Cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (G1/S & G2/M checkpoints)

• BUB1B, 15q15.1, Budding uninhibited by benzimidazoles 1 homolog beta (yeast)(spindle checkpoint function)

• FAM49A, 2p24.2, Family with sequence similarity 49, member A (?)

Which GEP Signature is Best?

Kuiper, R et al. Leukemia Epub June 22, 2012.

GEP : Take Home Lessons

• Among overlapping genes, most can be linked to a biological hypothesis• Replication/checkpoints/DNA repair

• Validation of their roles as mediators of high risk is needed pre-clinically

• Few have been drugged, and those that have were not studied in selected patients

• Of the ones that haven’t been drugged, few look like they would be tumor-specific

Diagnostic Criteria : MGUS, AMM

• The International Myeloma Working Group• MGUS

– Serum monoclonal (M) protein <3.0 g/dL, AND

– Marrow plasmacytosis <10% (if done), AND

– No disease-related symptoms

• Asymptomatic (smoldering) multiple myeloma– Serum M protein (IgG or IgA) ≥3.0 g/dL, AND/OR

– Marrow plasmacytosis ≥10%, AND

– No disease-related symptoms

Dimopoulos, M et al. Blood 117:4701, 2010.

Risk of Progression

• Approximately 1% per year for MGUS to myeloma or a related disorder

• ~10%/year in the first 5 years for asymptomatic/smoldering myeloma

Bladé, J et al. J Clin Oncol. 28:690, 2009.

Risk Stratifying MGUS• Low risk

– M protein <1.5 g/dL, IgG type and normal FLC ratio

✔ SPEP @ 6 mos., then q 2-3 years if stable and asymptomatic

• Intermediate/High risk– M protein ≥1.5 g/dL, non-IgG

type and abnormal FLC ratio ✔ SPEP @ 6 mos., then annually

Rajkumar, SV et al. Blood 106:812, 2005.Kyle, RA et al. Leukemia 24:1121, 2010.

Risk Stratifying AMM

• Three groups– 1: M-protein ≥3 g/dL,

marrow plasmacytosis ≥10%

– 2: M-protein <3 g/dL, plasmacytosis ≥10%

– 3: M-protein <3 g/dL, plasmacytosis <10%

Bladé, J et al. J Clin Oncol. 28:690, 2009.

Risk Stratification with sFLCs

• Three risk factors– Plasma cells ≥10%

– Serum M-protein ≥3 g/dL

– Serum free light chain ratio <0.125 or >8

• Groups 1 and 2 in both systems may be candidates for prevention trials

Bladé, J et al. J Clin Oncol. 28:690, 2009.

Diagnostic Criteria : SMM

• Symptomatic multiple myeloma– Clonal marrow plasmacytosis ≥10%, AND

– Serum and/or urine M-protein (unless non-secretory), AND

– Evidence of end-organ damage due to disease (CRAB)• HyperCalcemia (≥11.5 g/dL), or

• Renal insufficiency (>2 mg/dL), or

• Anemia (<10 g/dL or >2 g below nl), or

• Bone lesions (lytic or osteopenic), or

• Amyloidosis, or hyperviscosity, or frequent bacterial infections

Dimopoulos, M et al. Blood 117:4701, 2010.

Impact of Genome Sequencing

Chapman, MA et al. Nature 471:467, 2011.

• Frequent mutations in genes involved in RNA processing, protein translation, and the unfolded protein response

• How many can we target therapeutically ?

Other Gene Mutations

Chapman, MA et al. Nature 471:467, 2011.

• Do these involve micro RNAs and ncRNAs ?

Impact of Genome Sequencing

• Ability to detect different myeloma clones that wax and wane in importance with time

• We will need to be craftier than the myeloma

Keats, JJ et al. Blood Epub, April 12, 2012.

2010 ASH Abstract 991

A Multicenter, Randomised, Open-label, Phase III Study of Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone versus

Therapeutic Abstention in high-risk Smoldering MM

MV Mateos, L López-Corral, MT Hernández, J de la Rubia, JJ Lahuerta, P Giraldo, J Bargay, L Rosiñol, A Oriol, J García-Laraña, l Palomera, F de Arriba, F Prósper,

ML Martino, AI Teruel, J Hernández, G Estevez, M Mariz, A Alegre, JL Guzman, N Quintana, JL García, JF San Miguel.

On behalf of Spanish Myeloma Group (PETHEMA/GEM)

Study Design

StandardObservation

TreatmentCycles 1-9: Lenalidomide 25 mg po days 1-21 of every 28-day cycle +

dexamethasone 20 mg po on days 1-4 and 12-15

Later Cycles: Lenalidomide 10 mg po days 1-21 of every 2-month cycle

Asymptomatic Myeloma Patients

PC ≥ 10% + MP ≥ 3.0Or

PC ≥ 10% or MP ≥ 3.0 and ≥ 95% aberrant immunophenotype +

immunoparesis

• 1o objective: TTP to symptomatic myeloma

TTP to Active DiseaseMedian follow-up: 32 months (range 12–49)

Lenalidomide + dex

Median TTP: NR

9 Progressions (15%)

5 pts:early disc followed by DP

4 pts:symptomatic DP

No treatment

Median TTP: 23m

37 Progressions (59%)

20 patients: bone disease

7 patients: renal failure

HR: 6.0; 95% IC (2.9–12.6); p < 0.0001

Time from inclusion

Pro

por

tion

of

pat

ien

ts a

live

50454035302520151050

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

TTP Excluding Early DiscontinuationMedian follow-up: 32 months (range 12–49)

Lenalidomide + dex

Median TTP: NR

4 Progressions (7%)

4 pts:symptomatic PD

No treatment

Median TTP: 23m

37 Progressions (59%)

20 patients: bone disease

7 patients: renal failure

HR: 12.3; 95% IC (4.4–34.7); p < 0.0001

50454035302520151050

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Outcomes at Progression

At last f/u of maintenance therapy

14 biological progressions

Dex was added according to the protocol

• 2 pts: Improvement of response to PR• 10pts: Experienced stabilization of disease with dex

• 8 remain stable after a median f/u of 19 m (4-31)• 2 pts: Progressed to active disease after 4 and 12 m

• 1 pt: Progression to active disease before dex added• 1 pts: Withdrawal of informed consent

Overall Survival from Inclusion

Len + Dex

No treatment

Lenalidomide + Dex: 93% at 3 yearsNo treatment: 76% at 3 years

Time from inclusion

Pro

port

ion

of p

atie

nts

ali

ve

p=0.04

50454035302520151050

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Median follow-up: 32 months (range 12–49)

Overall Survival from Diagnosis

1009080706050403020100

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Len + Dex

No treatment

Time from inclusion

Pro

port

ion

of p

atie

nts

ali

ve

HR: 5.01; 95% IC (1–22); p=0.03

Lenalidomide + Dex: 94% at 5 yrsNo treatment: 79% at 5 yrs

Median follow-up: 38months (range 14–96)

Conclusions

• “Low risk” myeloma can be identified, but low risk ≠ no risk myeloma

• Current data support treating patients earlier in the disease process, not later

• An occasional patient with low risk myeloma may benefit from watchful waiting– Older patient with low disease burden

• Vast majority of low risk patients should be urgently started on induction therapy