INTRODUCTION
Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematological malignancy, accounting for an estimated 1% of all cancers [ 1 ]. Introduction of high-dose chemotherapy followed by stem cell rescue and novel treatment modalities such as immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) agents and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) over the past 20 years have led to improved survival rates in patients with MM [ 2 , 3 ]. Recently, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved two monoclonal antibodies indicated for the treatment of MM, which will further help improve the response and survival rates in relapsed refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Despite advances in its treatment, MM is still considered to be an incurable disease. For patients who relapse after treatment with novel agents therapeutic strategies are inadequate and usually result in a dismal prognosis. While some salvage treatments exist, patients may not respond to them or may be unable to tolerate them due to toxicities.
Bendamustine is a nitrogen mustard-based alkylating agent shown to be effective in the treatment of various hematologic malignancies. It can be safely administered to patients both with mild to moderate renal insufficiency and moderate hepatic insufficiency [ 4 , 5 ].
Bendamustine has been used for more than a decade for the treatment of MM, either as the sole therapy or in combination with steroids and other chemotherapeutics including novel agents [ 6 ]. Considerable efficacy has been reported in newly diagnosed as well as RR patients [ 7 , 8 ].
In this retrospective analysis we tried to explore the real-life effectiveness and safety of bendamustine in heavily pretreated MM patients refractory to IMiDs and PIs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Patients were identified by reviewing the medical records at the Hematology Department of Cerrahpaşa Medical Faculty, İstanbul University. This retrospective study included 19 patients who were RR to at least one of the IMiDs (thalidomide and lenalidomide) and one of the PIs (carfilzomib and bortezomib). Patient characteristics before bendamustine treatment are shown in Table 1 .
Bendamustine was given either with steroids (n=13) or in combination with novel agents (n=6) between January 2012 and May 2015 ( Table 1 ). Bendamustine dosage varied from 90 mg/m 2 to 120 mg/m 2 and it was administered intravenously on days 1 and 2 of a 28-day cycle as per the protocol described in previous studies [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Bendamustine was combined with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in three patients and with thalidomide and bortezomib in one patient each, respectively. Dexamethasone was given at up to 160 mg per cycle as tolerated. Patients received cotrimoxazole, acyclovir, and fluconazole prophylaxis during treatment.
Treatment response was assessed according to the International Myeloma Working Group Consensus Statement for the management, treatment, and supportive care of patients with myeloma [ 7 ]. Overall response rate (ORR) was defined to include complete response, very good partial response, partial response (PR), and minimal response. Overall survival (OS) was calculated as the time from the first day of the bendamustine cycle to death or last patient contact. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from bendamustine administration to the date at which criteria for progression were met or death, whichever occurred first. Adverse events were recorded and categorized based on the Common Technology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.0 (CTCAE). Time-to-event analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method (JMP v Pro 12).
RESULTS
Nineteen RRMM patients were included in the study. The median age was 62 years (minimum-maximum: 38-83) and there were 12 males (63%). Patients were heavily pretreated with a median number of 5 (minimum-maximum: 3-8) previous lines of therapy. The median time from diagnosis was 6 years (minimum-maximum: 1-16). All included patients had progressed under their last treatment regimen and had been exposed to all effective drugs available in the country prior to treatment with bendamustine.
Patients were not given a fixed number of bendamustine cycles. Treatment was discontinued in the case of considerable toxicity or ineffectiveness (disease progression).
Following a median of 2 (minimum-maximum: 1-8) treatment cycles, 4 patients showed PR (21%) and 2 patients had stable disease (11%), while in the rest of the patients the disease progressed (68%) ( Table 1 ). Median PFS was 59 days (minimum-maximum: 14-425) ( Figure 1 ) and OS was 120 days (minimum-maximum: 31-456) ( Figure 2 ). Eight patients died during the first 2 months of treatment due to disease progression.
Only eight of the patients were able to receive 3 or more cycles of bendamustine while in the rest of the cases treatment had to be discontinued due to disease progression. Median OS for patients treated with ≥3 and <3 cycles of bendamustine was 274 and 59 days, respectively ( Figure 3 ).
Bendamustine was well tolerated in patients who received it combined with steroids or with novel agents (IMiDs and PIs). The most commonly observed grade 3-4 adverse events included mild to moderate hematological toxicities. Among them, 12 (55%) patients had neutropenia, 5 (23%) patients had thrombocytopenia, and 2 (9%) patients had anemia. Apart from hematological toxicities, 2 (10%) patients developed lower respiratory tract infections of bacterial origin (CTCAE grades 3 and 4). Those patients were hospitalized and treated successfully with intravenous antibiotics. Treatment-related CTCAE grade 3-4 toxicities are summarized in Table 2 .
DISCUSSION
MM patients who are RR to treatment with IMiDs and bortezomib have been reported to have poor outcomes. According to a recent International Myeloma Working Group study, the median OS and PFS of patients refractory to IMiDs and bortezomib were found to be 9 and 5 months, respectively [ 12 ]. Options are very limited for those who become resistant to these agents and the vast majority of these patients are unable to tolerate most regimens due to toxicities. Bendamustine could be an option for these patients because of its low toxicity profile. Several clinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of bendamustine combined with novel agents in the first-line therapy of MM [ 13 , 14 , 15 ]. However, published data on bendamustine as monotherapy or in combination with steroids in the treatment of RRMM are limited. Michael et al. [ 10 ] in their retrospective analysis looked at the outcomes of RRMM patients (n=39) who were treated with bendamustine as a sole therapy or in combination with steroids. They reported an ORR of 36%, with median event-free survival (EFS) and OS of 7 and 17 months, respectively. In another retrospective study Damaj et al. [ 11 ] found an ORR of 30%. Median PFS and OS for the entire cohort were 9.3 and 12.4 months, respectively. An ORR of 59% was reported by Stöhr et al. [ 16 ] in heavily treated RRMM patients with a median OS of 17 months and an EFS of 7 months. Recently, Musto et al. [ 17 ] published results on 78 MM patients, most of whom were refractory to IMiDs and bortezomib. The ORR was 29%.
We present here a retrospective analysis of patients with RRMM who had been exposed to and were RR to PIs and IMiDs. Unlike our study, in former studies, not all patients had been previously exposed and were refractory to IMiDs and PIs. All of our patients were refractory to their last therapy and all of the patients had been heavily pretreated with all available agents. Furthermore, 5 of them were double-PI and double-IMiD refractory. Bendamustine was considered as a final option for our patients. A median of 2 (minimum-maximum: 1-8) treatment cycles were administered per patient.
The therapy was well tolerated and the most common side effect was neutropenia ( Table 2 ). Bendamustine generally has a favorable toxicity profile with moderate hematological events. Although it has been used for more than a decade for the treatment of myeloma, only a small number of studies reporting its efficacy and safety in different settings and combinations have emerged. A phase II trial defined a dose of 90 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 4 as the maximum tolerated dose of bendamustine when used in combination with bortezomib [ 18 ]. In another study, the maximum tolerated dose was not reached with 75 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 2 when combined with lenalidomide at 25 mg on days 1 to 21 [ 19 ]. In our study, 6 patients were given bendamustine in combination with novel agents ( Table 1 ). Bendamustine at 90 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 2 of a 28-day cycle was the preferred treatment protocol when administered in combination with the aforementioned novel agents. Twelve of our patients had grade 3-4 neutropenia. Although the efficacy achieved with combinations of bendamustine and other agents is promising, the overlapping myelosuppressive effects of these agents may be problematic. However, there are no clear dosage adjustment recommendations available and due to our small patient size we cannot present a firm conclusion in this regard.
Response rates in our cohort of patients were not as high as was reported in earlier studies. However, patients who could receive 3 or more cycles of bendamustine showed an OS advantage over the patients who were given less than 3 cycles. Nevertheless, statistical comparisons could not be performed due to the small patient numbers. Results of patients with ≥3 cycles were comparable to the best supportive care results in the literature ( Figure 3 ).
CONCLUSION
Small sample size and the retrospective nature of the study were the two main limitations of our study. Furthermore, cytogenetic profile data of most of the subjects were not available, which is an important issue when evaluating refractoriness to treatment. We think that the main contribution of our study to the current literature is showing the efficacy of bendamustine in heavily pretreated MM patients who were refractory to both IMiDs and PIs. In conclusion, previous studies have shown the efficacy of bendamustine treatment either as monotherapy or combined with novel agents in newly diagnosed MM patients. In RR settings, novel agent-naive patients were also shown to be responsive to bendamustine therapy [16,17]. However, we did not observe a benefit of bendamustine treatment in patients who were refractory to IMiDs and PIs. It is important to reiterate that our sample size does not permit us to make a precise statement. However, based on our experience with this relatively small number of patients, there is no clear recommendation to be made for the use of bendamustine in IMiD- and PI-resistant heavily pretreated MM patients. Such patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials evaluating new approaches.
Ethics Ethics Committee Approval: Retrospective study.
Authorship Contributions
Concept: F.F.Y., M.C.A.; Design: T.S., Y.A.; Data Collection or Processing: N.A., A.S.; Analysis or Interpretation: F.F.Y., E.E.; Literature Search: Ş.Ö.; Writing: F.F.Y.
Conflict of Interest: The authors of this paper have no conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests, relationships, and/or affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials included.
References
1 Smith A Howell D Patmore R Jack A Roman E Incidence of haematological malignancy by sub-type: a report from the Haematological Malignancy Research Network Br J Cancer 2011 105 1684 1692 22045184 10.1038/bjc.2011.450 PMC3242607
2 Grosicki S Barchnicka A Jurczyszyn A Grosicka A Bortezomib for the treatment of multiple myeloma Expert Rev Hematol 2014 7 173 185 24617331 10.1586/17474086.2014.899144
3 Kurtin SE Bilotti E Novel agents for the treatment of multiple myeloma: proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory agents J Adv Pract Oncol 2013 4 307 321 25032010 PMC4093443
4 Gentile M Recchia AG Mazzone C Vigna E Martino M Morabito L Lucia E Bossio S De Stefano L Granata T Palummo A Morabito F An old drug with a new future: bendamustine in multiple myeloma Expert Opin Pharmacother 2013 14 2263 2280 24053161 10.1517/14656566.2013.837885
5 McCloskey JK Broome CM Cheson BD Safe and effective treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma with rituximab and bendamustine in patients with severe liver impairment Clin Adv Hematol Oncol 2013 11 184 188 23598988
6 Palumbo A Offidani M Patriarca F Petrucci MT Cavo M Bendamustine for the treatment of multiple myeloma in first-line and relapsed-refractory settings: a review of clinical trial data Leuk Lymphoma 2015 56 559 567 24884319 10.3109/10428194.2014.915545
7 Ludwig H Kasparu H Leitgeb C Rauch E Linkesch W Zojer N Greil R Seebacher A Pour L Weißmann A Adam Z Bendamustine-bortezomib-dexamethasone is an active and well-tolerated regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma Blood 2014 123 985 991 24227817 10.1182/blood-2013-08-521468 PMC3924931
8 Pönisch W Bourgeois M Moll B Heyn S Jäkel N Wagner I Rohrberg R Hurtz HJ Schmalfeld M Aßmann M Edelmann T Mohren M Hoffmann FA Becker C Schwarzer A Schönfelder U Zehrfeld T Hensel G Löschcke K Krahl R Ali HA Niederwieser D Combined bendamustine, prednisone and bortezomib (BPV) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2013 139 499 508 23184429 10.1007/s00432-012-1339-3 PMC11824612
9 Knop S Straka C Haen M Schwedes R Hebart H Einsele H The efficacy and toxicity of bendamustine in recurrent multiple myeloma after high-dose chemotherapy Haematologica 2005 90 1287 1288 16154860
10 Michael M Bruns I Bölke E Zohren F Czibere A Safaian NN Neumann F Haas R Kobbe G Fenk R Bendamustine in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma Eur J Med Res 2010 15 13 19 20159666 10.1186/2047-783X-15-1-13 PMC3351842
11 Damaj G Malard F Hulin C Caillot D Garidi R Royer B Marit G Stoppa AM Banos A Morineau N Moreau P Fitoussi O Tiab M Moreau P Efficacy of bendamustine in relapsed/refractory myeloma patients: results from the French compassionate use program Leuk Lymphoma 2012 53 632 634 21916831 10.3109/10428194.2011.622422
12 Kumar SK Lee JH Lahuerta JJ Morgan G Richardson PG Crowley J Haessler J Feather J Hoering A Moreau P LeLeu X Hulin C Klein SK Sonneveld P Siegel D Bladé J Goldschmidt H Jagannath S Miguel JS Orlowski R Palumbo A Sezer O Rajkumar SV Durie BG International Myeloma Working Group Risk of progression and survival in multiple myeloma relapsing after therapy with IMiDs and bortezomib: a multicenter international myeloma working group study Leukemia 2012 26 149 157 21799510 10.1038/leu.2011.196 PMC4109061
13 Pönisch W Mitrou PS Merkle K Herold M Assmann M Wilhelm G Dachselt K Richter P Schirmer V Schulze A Subert R Harksel B Grobe N Stelzer E Schulze M Bittrich A Freund M Pasold R Friedrich T Helbig W Niederwieser D East German Study Group of Hematology and Oncology (OSHO) Treatment of bendamustine and prednisone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma results in superior complete response rate, prolonged time to treatment failure and improved quality of life compared to treatment with melphalan and prednisone--a randomized phase III study of the East German Study Group of Hematology and Oncology (OSHO) J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2006 132 205 212 16402269 10.1007/s00432-005-0074-4 PMC12161066
14 Pönisch W Holzvogt B Plötze M Andrea M Bourgeois M Heyn S Zehrfeld T Hammerschmidt D Schwarz M Edelmann T Becker C Hoffmann FA Schwarzer A Kreibich U Gutsche K Reifenrath K Winkelmann C Krahl R Remane Y Hennig E Schliwa T Lindner T Kaiser T Vucinic V Behre G Niederwieser D Bendamustine and prednisone in combination with bortezomib (BPV) in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed/untreated multiple myeloma J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2014 140 1947 1956 24942335 10.1007/s00432-014-1737-9 PMC11824045
15 Zwickl H Zwickl-Traxler E Pecherstorfer M A single-center retrospective analysis of first-line therapy of multiple myeloma with bendamustine-bortezomib-dexamethasone Leuk Lymphoma 2016 57 2065 2070 26901249 10.3109/10428194.2015.1126587
16 Stöhr E Schmeel FC Schmeel LC Hänel M Schmidt-Wolf IG German Refractory Myeloma Study Group Bendamustine in heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2015 141 2205 2212 26156122 10.1007/s00432-015-2014-2 PMC11824094
17 Musto P Fraticelli VL Mansueto G Madonna E Nozza A Andriani A Mussetti A Ballanti S Bongarzoni V Baraldi A Patriarca F Vincelli D Falcone A Derudas D Califano C Zambello R Mele G Fragasso A Baldini L Storti S Bendamustine in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: the “real-life” side of the moon Leuk Lymphoma 2015 56 1510 1513 25651428 10.3109/10428194.2014.982644
18 Berenson JR Yellin O Bessudo A Boccia RV Noga SJ Gravenor DS Patel-Donnelly D Siegel RS Kewalramani T Gorak EJ Nassir Y Swift RA Mayo D Phase I/II trial assessing bendamustine plus bortezomib combination therapy for the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma Br J Haematol 2013 160 321 330 23150919 10.1111/bjh.12129
19 Pönisch W Heyn S Beck J Wagner I Mohren M Hoffmann FA Lange T Schmalfeld M Zehrfeld T Schwarzer A Winkelmann C Edelmann T Röhrborn R Hebenstreit K Al-Ali HK Jäkel N Niederwieser D Lenalidomide, bendamustine and prednisolone exhibits a favourable safety and efficacy profile in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: final results of a phase 1 clinical trial OSHO - 077 Br J Haematol 2013 162 202 209 23692564 10.1111/bjh.12361