Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2020 Apr 10;38(11):1126-1137.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.01740. Epub 2019 Oct 25.

Randomized Trial of Lenalidomide Versus Observation in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Randomized Trial of Lenalidomide Versus Observation in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma

Sagar Lonial et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: Observation is the current standard of care for smoldering multiple myeloma. We hypothesized that early intervention with lenalidomide could delay progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma.

Methods: We conducted a randomized trial that assessed the efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide compared with observation in patients with intermediate- or high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Lenalidomide was administered orally at a dose of 25 mg on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival, with disease progression requiring the development of end-organ damage attributable to multiple myeloma and biochemical progression.

Results: One hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned-92 patients to the lenalidomide arm and 90 to the observation arm. Median follow-up is 35 months. Response to therapy was observed in 50% (95% CI, 39% to 61%) of patients in the lenalidomide arm, with no responses in the observation arm. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide compared with observation (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.62; P = .002). One-, 2-, and 3-year progression-free survival was 98%, 93%, and 91% for the lenalidomide arm versus 89%, 76%, and 66% for the observation arm, respectively. Only six deaths have been reported, two in the lenalidomide arm versus four in the observation arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.53). Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic adverse events occurred in 25 patients (28%) on lenalidomide.

Conclusion: Early intervention with lenalidomide in smoldering multiple myeloma significantly delays progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma and the development of end-organ damage.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01169337.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIG 1.
FIG 1.
CONSORT diagram for phase III. FLC, free light chain; SPEP, serum protein electropheresis; UPEP, urine protein electropheresis.
FIG 2.
FIG 2.
Time to event estimates by treatment arm in phase III: (A) progression-free survival, (B) cumulative incidence of progression, and (C) overall survival in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma. Len, lenalidomide; Obs, observation.
FIG 3.
FIG 3.
Treatment hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival in subgroups in phase III. ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.
FIG 4.
FIG 4.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival by treatment arm within Mayo 2008 risk subgroups in phase III: (A) high risk, (B) intermediate risk, and (C) low risk.
FIG 5.
FIG 5.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival by treatment arm within Mayo 2018 risk subgroup: (A) high risk, (B) intermediate risk, and (C) low risk.
FIG A1.
FIG A1.
CONSORT diagram for phase II. FLC, free light chain; SPEP, serum protein electropheresis; UPEP, urine protein electropheresis.
FIG A2.
FIG A2.
Time to event estimates in phase II: (A) progression-free survival, (B) cumulative incidence of progression, and (C) overall survival in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma. Len, lenalidomide.
FIG A3.
FIG A3.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival by treatment arm within fluorescence in situ hybridization risk subgroups in phase III: (A) high risk, (B) intermediate risk, and (C) low risk.
FIG A4.
FIG A4.
Swimmer’s plot patterns of treatment duration and follow-up by reason off-treatment (Tx): (A) Patients off-treatment phase II. (B) Patients off treatment phase III. AE, adverse event; PFS, progression-free survival; WD, withdrawal.
FIG A5.
FIG A5.
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival within prognostic subgroups in phase III: (A) Mayo 2008 risk stratification, (B) Mayo 2018 risk stratification, and (C) fluorescence in situ hybridization risk stratification.
FIG A6.
FIG A6.
Health-related quality of life scores over time in phase III by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G): (A) FACT-G: Physical plus functional (P+F) well-being score (range, 0-56). (B) FACT-multiple myeloma (MM) score (range, 0-56). (C) FACT-G: Physical (P) well-being score (range, 0-28). (D) FACT-G: Functional (F) well-being score (range, 0-28).

Comment in

References

    1. Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:e538–e548. - PubMed
    1. Ghobrial IM, Landgren O. How I treat smoldering multiple myeloma. Blood. 2014;124:3380–3388. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kyle RA, Remstein ED, Therneau TM, et al. Clinical course and prognosis of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2582–2590. - PubMed
    1. Rajkumar SV, Landgren O, Mateos MV. Smoldering multiple myeloma. Blood. 2015;125:3069–3075. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cherry BM, Korde N, Kwok M, et al. Modeling progression risk for smoldering multiple myeloma: Results from a prospective clinical study. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54:2215–2218. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data