Plitidepsin in combination with dexamethasone (ADMYRE trial) versus an external control arm of pomalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
Abstract
Abstract External Control arms (ECAs) help to evaluate the effectiveness of a new treatment by comparing its outcomes with those of a similar group of patients who received standard care or a different treatment. Plitidepsin (P) 5 mg/m2 i.v. on Day 1 and 15 every four weeks (q4wk) plus low-dose dexamethasone (LD-DXM) (40 mg weekly) was evaluated versus (vs) LD-DXM alone (40 mg weekly) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (r/r MM) exposed to ³3-6 prior treatment lines in the randomized phase III ADMYRE trial. In absence of a randomized study with P+LD-DXM vs POM+LD-DXM (approved in a similar population to the ADMYRE trial), a direct matched comparison between P+LD-DXM (ADMYRE data) and pomalidomide (POM) (4 mg orally on Day 1 through Day 21) +LD-DXM (40 mg orally on Day 1, 8, 15 and 22 q4wk; 20 mg in patients > 75 years) as an ECA was conducted using individual patient-level data from several contemporary POM trials. Data from 8 phase II/III studies evaluating POM+LD-DXM contemporaneous to the ADMYRE trial and with a similar design were used for the analysis. A first analysis (ECA1) showed that P+LD-DXM was non-inferior to POM+LD-DXM in terms of overall survival (OS): median OS was 11.8 vs. 13.9 months; hazard ratio (HR)=1.009 (95% CI, 0.812-1.254; two-sided log-rank test p=0.9336). In patients <75 years, median OS was 13.0 vs. 13.8 months; and HR was 0.910 (95%CI, 0.718-1.154) (two-sided log-rank test p=0.4366). Safety profile showed a lower rate of grade ≥3 hematological treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) (neutropenia 2.5% vs. 37.1%; thrombocytopenia 2.5% vs. 13.2%) and infections (8.1% vs. 18.7%) for P+DXM, and a higher rate of grade ≥1 gastrointestinal TRAEs (52.8% vs. 27.4%), grade ≥3 blood creatine phosphokinase (14.3% vs. 0%) and grade ≥3 myalgia (5.6% vs. 0%). A second analysis (ECA2) compared POM+LD-DXM with the LD-DXM alone arm included in ADMYRE and showed a treatment effect in OS (HR=0.762; 95%CI, 0.566-1.026) similar to that observed in the ADMYRE trial (HR=0.797, 95%CI, 0.596-1.067). In patients < 75 years, the HR was 0.748 (95%CI, 0.543-1.031) (two-sided log-rank test p=0.0760). Safety profile of POM+LD-DXM was associated to a higher rate of AEs, as expected for a combination. In conclusion, P+LD-DXM can be considered an alternative therapeutic option in r/r MM as this comparison in terms of OS shows that P+LD-DXM is non-inferior to POM+LD-DXM with an advantageous safety profile in terms of hematological and infection events.
Article Details
Authors (13)
Heinz Ludwig
Evangelos Terpos
Mario Boccadoro
Sara Martinez
Carmen Kahatt
3PharmaMar, Clinical Oncology, Madrid, Spain
Javier Jimenez Jimenez
3PharmaMar, Clinical Oncology, Madrid, Spain
Antonio Nieto
4PharmaMar, Clinical Oncology, Madrid, Spain
Sonia Extremera
3PharmaMar, Clinical Oncology, Madrid, Spain
Javier Gomez
Vicente Alfaro
3PharmaMar, Clinical Oncology, Madrid, Spain
Ruthanna Davi
5Medidata Solutions, Inc., New York, a Dassault Systèmes company, New York, United States
Xiang Yin
Key Laboratory for Anisotropy and Texture of Materials (Ministry of Education), School of Material Science and Engineering
María-Victoria Mateos