• Users Online: 1695
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 
Table of Contents
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 2  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 271-272

Changing landscape of induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma


1 Department of Medical Oncology, Mazumdar Shaw Medical Center, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Medical Oncology, Ramaiah Medical College, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Date of Web Publication20-Dec-2019

Correspondence Address:
Nidhi Tandon
Department of Medical Oncology, Mazumdar Shaw Medical Center, Narayana Hrudayalaya, Bommasandra Industrial Area, Bengaluru - 560 099, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/CRST.CRST_86_19

Get Permissions


How to cite this article:
Tandon N, Devadas SK, Khanderia M. Changing landscape of induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Cancer Res Stat Treat 2019;2:271-2

How to cite this URL:
Tandon N, Devadas SK, Khanderia M. Changing landscape of induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Cancer Res Stat Treat [serial online] 2019 [cited 2020 Feb 28];2:271-2. Available from: http://www.crstonline.com/text.asp?2019/2/2/271/273701



Bagal and Bonda have put forth a very comprehensive article about the development of the regimens used in induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM), which have resulted in deeper and more durable responses that translate into improved overall survival.[1]

Despite the advances in diagnosis, prognosis, and staging of MM and the incorporation of various novel therapies, the intrinsic or acquired resistance to treatment leads to eventual relapse and fatal outcomes in vast majority of patients. Hence, MM still remains an incurable disease with an overall survival of 52.2% at 5 years according to surveillance, epidemiology, and end results analysis.[2] This article, therefore, becomes imperative as it discusses the strategies aimed at improvement of the existing induction regimens which will not only resolve the associated end-organ damage as early as possible but will also result in deeper and more durable responses, including minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity.

The review gives us extensive detail about the role of newer proteasome inhibitors (PI, carfilzomib) and immunomodulators (IMiD, pomalidomide), addition of another cytotoxic drug (alkylator/anthracyclines) or monoclonal antibodies (daratumumab), and personalized induction regimens based on genomic alteration. It is addressed that the way forward might be a monoclonal antibody-based quadruplet regimen incorporating PI, IMiD, and steroids which will be a major milestone in the treatment paradigm of NDMM. The authors also emphasize the significance of adding a cytotoxic drug or sequential use of available agents in resource-limited settings.

The importance of achievement of the best depth of response including MRD negativity with the use of induction therapy has been stressed upon in the article. However, it will be worthwhile to add that a rapid or late achievement of very good partial response or better with first-line treatment does not affect long-term survival outcomes.[3] Furthermore, the authors might include the role of multidrug regimen such as VDTPACE incorporating bortezomib in patients presenting with very aggressive disease, including plasma cell leukemia features or rapidly progressive disease with or without extramedullary features.[4] In addition, the contribution of personalized treatment based on disease biology including cytogenetics such as the impact of bortezomib in patients with t(4;14) and perhaps del(17p) and the use of carfilzomib in high-risk myeloma could be highlighted.[5]

In conclusion, monoclonal antibody-based regimens are making their way to the frontline setting for both transplant-eligible and transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Emerging treatment strategies will offer individualized treatment options using risk stratification to guide choice of induction therapy and may ultimately lead to the possibility of a cure for myeloma patients.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Bagal B, Bonda A. Induction therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: Current research scenario and questions for the future. Cancer Res Stat Treat 2019;2:76-82.  Back to cited text no. 1
  [Full text]  
2.
Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/mulmy.html. [Last accessed on 2019 Nov 05].  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Tandon N, Sidana S, Rajkumar SV, Gertz MA, Buadi FK, Lacy MQ, et al. Outcomes with early response to first-line treatment in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood Adv 2019;3:744-50.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Kapoor P, Ramakrishnan V, Rajkumar SV. Bortezomib combination therapy in multiple myeloma. Semin Hematol 2012;49:228-42.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Paul B, Lipe B, Ocio E, Usmaani S. Induction therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2019;39:e176-86.  Back to cited text no. 5
    



This article has been cited by
1 Author reply to - Jain H. et al. and Tandon N. et al.
Bhausaheb Bagal,Avinash Bonda
Cancer Research, Statistics, and Treatment. 2019; 2(2): 272
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed96    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded8    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal