» Articles » PMID: 26282661

Continuous Therapy Versus Fixed Duration of Therapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Abstract

Purpose: Continuous therapy (CT) prolongs progression-free survival 1 (PFS1; time from random assignment until the first progression or death), but chemotherapy-resistant relapse may negatively impact overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival 2 (PFS2; time from random assignment until the second progression or death) may represent an additional tool to estimate outcome. This study evaluates the benefit of novel agent-based CT versus fixed duration of therapy (FDT) in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma.

Methods: We included patients enrolled onto three phase III trials that randomly assigned patients to novel agent-based CT versus FDT. Primary analyses were restricted to the intent-to-treat population eligible for CT (patients progression free and alive at 1 year after random assignment). Primary end points were PFS1, PFS2, and OS. All hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were adjusted for several potential confounders using Cox models.

Results: In the pooled analysis of the three trials, 604 patients were randomly assigned to CT and 614 were assigned to FDT. Median follow-up was 52 months. In the intent-to-treat CT population, CT (n = 417), compared with FDT (n = 410), significantly improved PFS1 (median, 32 v 16 months, respectively; HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.56; P < .001), PFS2 (median, 55 v 40 months, respectively; HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.75; P < .001), and OS (4-year OS, 69% v 60%, respectively; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.88; P = .003).

Conclusion: In this pooled analysis, CT significantly improved PFS1, PFS2, and OS. The improvement in PFS2 suggests that the benefit reported during first remission is not cancelled by a shorter second remission. PFS2 is a valuable end point to estimate long-term clinical benefit and should be included in future trials.

Citing Articles

Cost-effectiveness analysis of combination therapies involving novel agents for first/second-relapse patients with multiple myeloma: a Markov model approach with calibration techniques.

Wu W, Tang F, Wang Y, Yang W, Zhao Z, Gao Y Health Econ Rev. 2025; 15(1):21.

PMID: 40088315 DOI: 10.1186/s13561-025-00611-0.


Ixazomib or Lenalidomide combined with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone in the treatment of elderly transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Wang Y, Liu Y, Jin S, Tao Y, Zhang W, Chen J Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1):6538.

PMID: 39994363 PMC: 11850894. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-91126-5.


The Perspective of Romanian Patients on Continuous Therapy for Multiple Myeloma.

Irimia R, Badelita S, Barbu S, Zidaru L, Carlan I, Preda O J Pers Med. 2024; 14(9).

PMID: 39338164 PMC: 11433240. DOI: 10.3390/jpm14090910.


T Cell-Redirecting Bispecific Antibodies in Multiple Myeloma: Optimal Dosing Schedule and Duration of Treatment.

van de Donk N, Rasche L, Sidana S, Zweegman S, Garfall A Blood Cancer Discov. 2024; 5(6):388-399.

PMID: 39321136 PMC: 11528190. DOI: 10.1158/2643-3230.BCD-24-0124.


Genomic Classification and Individualized Prognosis in Multiple Myeloma.

Maura F, Rajanna A, Ziccheddu B, Poos A, Derkach A, Maclachlan K J Clin Oncol. 2024; 42(11):1229-1240.

PMID: 38194610 PMC: 11095887. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.23.01277.