Total therapy 5 (TT5) for newly diagnosed high-risk multiple myeloma (HRMM): Comparison with predecessor trials total therapy 3a and 3b (TT3 a/b).

Lymphoma and Plasma Cell Disorders
Session Type and Session Title: 
Poster Discussion Session, Lymphoma and Plasma Cell Disorders
Abstract Number: 



J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl; abstr 8539)


Saad Zafar Usmani, Sarah Waheed, Frits Van Rhee, Alan Mitchell, Alejandro Restrepo, Monica Grazziutti, John Crowley, Bart Barlogie; Myeloma Institute for Research and Therapy, Little Rock, AR; Cancer Research and Biostatistics, Seattle, WA

Abstracts that were granted an exception in accordance with ASCO's Conflict of Interest Policy are designated with a caret symbol (^).

Abstract Disclosures

Abstracts that were granted an exception in accordance with ASCO's Conflict of Interest Policy are designated with a caret symbol (^).

Background: HRMM has not benefited from advances achieved in the remainder 85% with low-risk MM. In order to guard against relapses during previous drug-free intervals in TT3, TT5 was designed as a dose-dense and less dose-intense program. Here we are reporting for the first time on the TT5 outcomes in comparison with TT3a/b results in HRMM. Methods: TT5 called for M-VTD-PACE induction with HPC collection. This was followed by tandem autologous stem cell transplants (ASCT) with hybrid regimens Mel80 plus VRD-PACE, sandwiched in between were 2 inter-transplant cycles of MEL20-VTD-PACE. Maintenance consisted of 3 years of alternating VRD and VMD (M, melphalan). As relapses were observed during maintenance, bortezomib was increased from 1.3mg/m2 to 1.5mg/m2 weekly. Results were compared with HRMM treated with TT3a/b (n=40/37). Data were compared with TT3 HRMM, involving 77 patients. Overall survival and progression free survival was analyzed employing Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox regression modeling was done for univariate and multivariate analyses. Results: Of 59 patients enrolled in TT5, CR was 66% including 10% with s-CR. The 18-mo OS was 92% v 74% with TT3 (p=0.009), whereas PFS was similar at 67% and 69%, respectively. A newly developed GEP-5 model distinguished 8 patients with a 36-mo OS estimate of 20% versus almost 90% for the remainder (p=0.04). On multivariate analysis that included TT5 and TT3, our GEP80 low-risk score, TT5 (vs TT3) and age <65yr were independent features linked to superior OS. Conclusions: This isthe first report of a dose-dense chemotherapeutic approach for newly diagnosed HRMM, which also introduced a hybrid Mel80-VRDPACE hybrid preparative regimen for ASCT. TT5 represents an advance in the management of GEP70-defined HRMM compared to predecessor trials TT3a/b for similar patients, with significant improvement in overall survival and tolerability compared with TT3 a/b. Clinical trial information: NCT00081939, NCT00572169, NCT00869232.