13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Thrombosis in patients with myeloma treated in the Myeloma IX and Myeloma XI phase 3 randomized controlled trials

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          There is a [Related article:] Blood Commentary on this article in this issue.

          Key Points

          • VTE risk is high for NDMM patients receiving treatment and only modestly reduced by IMWG-guided thromboprophylaxis.

          • VTE risk is equivalent for thalidomide and lenalidomide regimens, and in these trials, VTE was not associated with reduced PFS or OS.

          Abstract

          Newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients treated with immunomodulatory drugs are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but data are lacking from large prospective cohorts. We present thrombosis outcome data from Myeloma IX (n = 1936) and Myeloma XI (n = 4358) phase 3 randomized controlled trials for NDMM that treated transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients before and after publication of thrombosis prevention guidelines. In Myeloma IX, transplant-eligible patients randomly assigned to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (CVAD) induction had higher risk of VTE compared with patients treated with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (CTD) (22.5% [n = 121 of 538] vs 16.1% [n = 89 of 554]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR],1.46; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.11-1.93). For transplant-ineligible patients, those randomly assigned to attenuated CTD (CTDa) induction had a higher risk of VTE compared with those treated with melphalan and prednisolone (MP) (16.0% [n = 68 of 425] vs 4.1% [n = 17 of 419]; aHR, 4.25; 95% CI, 2.50-7.20). In Myeloma XI, there was no difference in risk of VTE (12.2% [n = 124 of 1014] vs 13.2% [n = 133 of 1008]; aHR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.18) or arterial thrombosis (1.2% [n = 12 of 1014] vs 1.5% [n = 15 of 1008]; aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.37-1.70) between transplant-eligible pathways for patients treated with cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (CRD) or CTD. For transplant-ineligible patients, there was no difference in VTEs between attenuated CRD (CRDa) and CTDa (10.4% [n = 95 of 916] vs 10.7% [n = 97 of 910]; aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73-1.29). However, arterial risk was higher with CRDa than with CTDa (3.1% [n = 28 of 916] vs 1.6% [n = 15 of 910]; aHR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.57). Thrombotic events occurred almost entirely within 6 months of treatment initiation. Thrombosis was not associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS), apart from inferior OS for patients with arterial events (aHR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08) in Myeloma XI. The Myeloma XI trial protocol incorporated International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) thrombosis prevention recommendations and compared with Myeloma IX, more patients received thromboprophylaxis (80.5% vs 22.3%) with lower rates of VTE for identical regimens (CTD, 13.2% vs 16.1%; CTDa, 10.7% vs 16.0%). However, thrombosis remained frequent in spite of IMWG-guided thromboprophylaxis, suggesting that new approaches are needed.

          Visual Abstract

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Blood
          bloodjournal
          blood
          Blood
          Blood
          American Society of Hematology (Washington, DC )
          0006-4971
          1528-0020
          27 August 2020
          21 May 2020
          27 August 2020
          : 136
          : 9
          : 1091-1104
          Affiliations
          [1 ]School of Translational Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom;
          [2 ]Clinical Trials Research Unit, Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom;
          [3 ]Leeds Cancer Centre, Leeds, United Kingdom;
          [4 ]The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom;
          [5 ]The Royal Marsden Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom;
          [6 ]University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, United Kingdom;
          [7 ]Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom;
          [8 ]Clinical Immunology, School of Immunity and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom;
          [9 ]Haematological Malignancy Diagnostic Service, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, United Kingdom;
          [10 ]Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY; and
          [11 ]Freeman Hospital, University of Newcastle, Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom
          Author information
          https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5248-8165
          https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9930-6648
          https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1717-0412
          https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2338-0179
          https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0216-7464
          Article
          PMC7453153 PMC7453153 7453153 2020/BLD2020005125
          10.1182/blood.2020005125
          7453153
          32438407
          2391e763-c1ec-470e-996e-e69f54bdf0f1
          © 2020 by The American Society of Hematology
          History
          : 30 January 2020
          : 23 April 2020
          Page count
          Pages: 14
          Categories
          37
          39
          102
          Thrombosis and Hemostasis
          Custom metadata
          free

          Comments

          Comment on this article