Phase I-II Trial of Oral Cyclophosphamide, Prednisone and Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) (CPR) for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract 3055 Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) and dexamethasone is an effective regimen for relapsed/refractory (rel/ref) multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts) with an overall response rate of 60% and median time to progression of 13.4 months (Dimopoulos ME, et al. Leukemia 2009; 23: 2147-52). We combined lenalidomide with the alkylating agent combination of cyclophosphamide and prednisone—an older regimen with minimal cumulative myelosuppression and good activity as second or third line therapy (Trieu Y, et al, Mayo Clin Proc 2005; 80: 1582). The CPR regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide (CY) on days 1, 8, and 15, lenalidomide on days 1–21 and prednisone 100 mg q 2 days in a 28-day cycle. ASA 81 mg/day was given as DVT prophylaxis. Three dose levels were evaluated using a 3 × 3 dose escalation design. Thirty-two pts were entered between 11/2007-06/2009; median age was 64 (42-80) yrs, 60% were male, and immunoglobulin isotype was IgG in 19 (62%), IgA in 8 (25%) and light chain in 4 (13%) pts. Median β2-microglobulin level was 257 (92-767) nm/L, albumin 39 (34-48) g/L, creatinine 83 (50-126) μmol/L, platelet count 355 (75-479) × 109/L and ANC 2.5 (1.1-6.1) × 109/L. The median number of prior regimens was 2 (1-5). Prior therapy included: ASCT (single in 91%; double in 19%), thalidomide (28%) and bortezomib (50%). FISH cytogenetics were available in 13 pts; 1 had del 13q but none had t(4;14) or del p53. Table 1 summarizes protocol treatment delivered. Table 1. Dose level N Cyclophosphamide dose (mg/m2) Lenalidomide dose (mg) Prednisone dose (mg) Median # cycles given 1 3 150 15 100 12 (12–34+) 2 3 150 25 100 10 (9–23) 3 26 300 25 100 17 (5–28+) 1–3 (All) 32 150–300 15–25 100 19 (5–34+) Dose limiting toxicity was not observed during cycle 1 at any dose level. Grade 3–4 toxicities during the trial included: thrombocytopenia in 7 (22%) and neutropenia in 9 (29%), managed with dose reduction and/or growth factors; five episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred, all at dose level 3. In cohort 3, other grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicities included 1 episode each of abdominal pain/bacteremia, hypokalemia, fatigue, sick sinus syndrome, cardiac amyloidosis, perforated diverticulum and 2 episodes of DVT. Two heavily pretreated pts developed 2° MDS, including 1 previously treated for lymphoma, 43 and 190 mos after the diagnosis of MM. The best response using modified EBMT criteria was documented at a median of 7 (1-26) cycles and included the following: dose level 1 (1 CR, 2 PR); dose level 2 (1 VGPR, 2 PR); dose level 3 (4 CR, 14 VGPR, 11 PR, 1 MR and 1 stable disease). At a median F/U of 16 (5-34) months, 13 pts remain on study and 18 have progressed at a median of 10 (2-23) mos; 1 was lost to F/U and 9 have died of progressive MM. The 1-year actuarial OS and PFS rates are 93% (95% CI 76–98%) and 78% (95% CI 60–89%), respectively. We conclude: 1) the combination of full doses of the agents in CPR can be given in a 28 day cycle with an acceptable safety profile; 2) the objective response rate (CR + PR + MR) in all 32 pts to date is 94%; 3) the 1-year OS of 93% and PFS of 78% compare favorably with other 3-drug combinations in rel/ref MM pts; 4) further evaluation of this regimen in newly diagnosed pts would be of interest. Disclosures: Reece: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Combination of lenalidomide and cyclophosphamide and prednisone in relapsed and refractory myeloma patients. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".