47
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      国产与原研硼替佐米治疗初诊多发性骨髓瘤的疗效和安全性 Translated title: Efficacy and safety of domestic and brand name bortezomib in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          随着蛋白酶体抑制剂、免疫调节药物及新型免疫药物的出现,多发性骨髓瘤(MM)的治疗在过去几十年发生了显著变化,MM患者的预后显著改善,其中硼替佐米因其独特的泛素化作用成为治疗MM的主要药物之一,然而高昂的治疗成本使得硼替佐米在临床中使用较少[1]。2017年,国产硼替佐米问世,仍缺乏大样本、前瞻性、随机对照研究证明其疗效及安全性。本研究对使用国产与原研硼替佐米患者的临床资料进行比较,现将结果报道如下。 病例与方法 1.研究对象:回顾性分析2017年5月至2019年2月郑州大学第一附属医院、新乡医学院第一附属医院及河南大学淮河医院收治的88例接受国产硼替佐米(江苏豪森药业股份有限公司产品)治疗的初诊MM(NDMM)患者,按1∶1的比例选择88例既往接受原研硼替佐米(西安杨森制药有限公司产品)治疗的NDMM患者。所有患者的中位年龄59(40~80)岁,诊断均符合中国MM诊治指南(2017年修订)[2]。所有患者在接受硼替佐米治疗前均未接受传统化疗药物、烷化剂、激素、免疫调节剂等。 2.治疗方法:所有患者均采用VTD(硼替佐米+沙利度胺+地塞米松)方案治疗:硼替佐米1.3 mg/m2,第1、4、8、11天皮下注射;沙利度胺100 mg/d,口服;地塞米松10~20 mg/d,第1、2、4、5、8、9、11、12天静脉滴注。21 d为1个疗程,所有患者至少完成2个疗程。若治疗过程中出现Ⅰ级周围神经病变伴疼痛或Ⅱ级周围神经病变,硼替佐米减量为1 mg·m−2·d−1;若出现Ⅱ级周围神经病变伴疼痛或Ⅲ级周围神经病变,暂停硼替佐米,不良反应好转后决定下一步治疗方案;若出现Ⅳ级周围神经病变,停止硼替佐米治疗。 3.疗效评估:疗效评估参照中国MM诊治指南(2017年修订)[2],包括:完全缓解(CR)、非常好的部分缓解(VGPR)、部分缓解(PR)、微小缓解(MR)、疾病稳定(SD)、疾病进展(PD)、临床复发、CR后复发。客观缓解(OR)定义为PR及以上(PR + VGPR + CR),≥VGPR定义为VGPR及以上(VGPR+CR)。 4.安全性评估:对所有接受硼替佐米治疗时出现的不良反应进行监测,MM患者接受硼替佐米治疗过程中出现的不良反应均参照美国国家癌症研究所(NCI)常见不良反应评价系统通用不良反应术语标准(CTCAE)4.0版进行评估。 5.统计学处理:应用SPSS 17.0软件进行统计学分析。定性资料的比较采用χ 2检验、连续校正、Fisher确切概率法。定量资料组间比较采用两独立样本t检验。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。 结果 1.基本特征:国产硼替佐米组88例患者,中位年龄60(41~80)岁,男47例,女41例;原研硼替佐米组88例,中位年龄56(40~76)岁,男49例,女39例。两组患者的基线临床特征见表1。 表1 国产硼替佐米组与原研硼替佐米组多发性骨髓瘤患者的基线临床特征(例) 项目 国产硼替佐米(88例) 原研硼替佐米(88例) 统计量 P值 性别(男/女) 47/41 49/39 0.092(χ 2值) 0.762 中位年龄(岁) 60 56 1.433(t值) 0.154 M蛋白类型 1.323(χ 2值) 0.724  IgG 39 44  IgA 16 13  轻链 25 26  其他a 8 5 DS分期 0.604(χ 2值) 0.739  I 11 11  II 15 19  III 62 58 ISS分期 3.094(χ 2值) 0.213  I 14 22  II 29 31  III 45 35 R-ISS分期 5.762(χ 2值) 0.056  I 16 9  II 61 57  III 11 22 肾功能不全 1.249(χ 2值) 0.264  无 62 55  有 26 33 浆细胞比例 0.772(χ 2值) 0.380  >60% 14 10  10%~60% 74 78 慢性乙型肝炎 <0.001(χ 2值) 1.000  有 5 4  无 83 84 髓外浸润 1.529(χ 2值) 0.216  有 11 17  无 77 71 骨髓纤维化 0.831(χ 2值) 0.362  有 13 9  无 75 79 FISH  17p- 3.610(χ 2值) 0.057   阳性 6 14   阴性 82 74  13q14- 0.115(χ 2值) 0.735   阳性 23 25   阴性 65 63  13q14.3- 0.029(χ 2值) 0.865   阳性 24 23   阴性 64 65  1q21扩增 2.071(χ 2值) 0.150   阳性 24 16   阴性 64 72  t(11;14) 0.769(χ 2值) 0.380   阳性 24 19   阴性 64 69  t(4;14) 0.248(χ 2值) 0.619   阳性 8 10   阴性 80 78  t(14;16) 0.656(χ 2值) 0.418   阳性 6 9   阴性 82 79 注:a:包括IgD型、IgM型、双克隆型及不分泌型;DS分期、ISS分期、R-ISS分期均参照文献[2]评估 2.疗效评估:①不同疗程组疗效比较:国产硼替佐米组接受2、4、6个疗程VTD方案的患者分别为88、44、12例,原研硼替佐米组接受2、4、6个疗程VTD方案的患者分别为88、68、26例。两组应用2、4、6个疗程VTD方案后,OR率、CR率的差异均无统计学意义(表2)。随着诱导疗程数的增加,OR、≥VGPR、CR率增加,国产硼替佐米组4个疗程组≥VGPR率高于2个疗程组(45.45%对23.86%,χ 2=6.386,P=0.012),国产硼替佐米4个疗程组CR率高于2个疗程组(25.00%对5.68%,χ 2=10.277,P=0.001)。原研硼替佐米6个疗程组OR、≥VGPR、CR率均高于4个疗程组(OR率:88.46%对55.88%,χ 2=8.763,P=0.003;≥VGPR率:69.23%对35.29%,χ 2=8.764,P=0.003;CR率:46.15%对16.18%,χ 2=9.146,P=0.002)。②不同R-ISS分期组疗效比较:国产硼替佐米组R-ISS分期Ⅰ期16例,Ⅱ期61例,Ⅲ期11例。原研硼替佐米组R-ISS分期Ⅰ期9例,Ⅱ期57例,Ⅲ期22例。两组不同R-ISS分期患者的OR率、CR率差异均无统计学意义(表2)。③不同年龄组疗效比较:国产硼替佐米组≤65岁65例,>65岁23例。原研硼替佐米组≤65岁70例,>65岁18例。两组不同年龄段的OR率、CR率差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),详见表2。 表2 国产硼替佐米组与原研硼替佐米组不同疗程数、R-ISS分期、年龄段疗效比较(例) 组别 疗程 R-ISS分期 年龄 2个疗程 4个疗程 6个疗程 Ⅰ期 Ⅱ期 Ⅲ期 ≤65岁 >65岁 OR CR OR CR OR CR OR CR OR CR OR CR OR CR OR CR 国产硼替佐米 57 5 29 11 11 5 14 4 43 16 6 0 46 15 17 2 原研硼替佐米 49 12 38 11 23 12 6 4 37 21 9 1 40 19 12 7   χ 2值 1.518 3.191 1.117 1.318 - - - - 0.420 1.542 - - 2.707 0.296 0.256 3.755   P值 0.218 0.074 0.290 0.251 1.000 1.000 0.312 0.394 0.517 0.214 0.488 1.000 0.100 0.587 0.613 0.053 注:OR:客观缓解;CR:完全缓解;-:应用Fisher确切概率法 3.安全性评估:①血液学不良反应:国产硼替佐米组和原研硼替佐米组血小板减少发生率差异无统计学意义(20.45%对30.68%,χ 2=0.018,P=0.893);国产硼替佐米组和原研硼替佐米组中性粒细胞减少发生率差异无统计学意义(26.14%对37.50%,χ 2=0.028,P=0.868)。②非血液学不良反应:两组非血液学不良反应(恶心、呕吐、腹泻、便秘、周围神经病变、肺部感染、带状疱疹、皮疹)发生率差异均无统计学意义。国产硼替佐米组和原研硼替佐米组Ⅰ~Ⅱ级周围神经病变的发生率分别为21.59%和30.68%,Ⅲ~Ⅳ级周围神经病变的发生率分别为1.34%和2.27%(P>0.05)。 讨论 本研究中,原研硼替佐米组VTD方案治疗MM的OR率为66.15%,其中CR率为29.23%,VGPR率为18.46%,PR率为18.46%。即往国内研究报道的OR率为71.10%~83.33%,CR率为17.20%~46.10%,VGPR率为17.20%~33.33%,PR率为13.30%~30.00%[3]–[6],本研究与上述报道数据相一致,但整体数据低于国外Cavo等[7]研究(OR率94%,VGPR率62%),可能与本研究患者例数偏少,VTD方案用法差异,疗程数不充分,深度缓解未显示有关。国产硼替佐米组的OR率低于国内蔡惠丽等[8]的研究(71.59%对86.67%),CR率高于蔡惠丽等[8]的研究(19.32%对13.33%)。另外,国产硼替佐米组2个疗程及4个疗程的OR率低于张怡安等[9]的报道,可能与两者的治疗方案、疗程数、高危细胞遗传学比例不同相关,目前关于国产硼替佐米的临床研究数据较少,这一差异需要进一步的研究证实。 随着诱导疗程数的增加,两组OR率、≥VGPR率、CR率增加。其中国产硼替佐米组4个疗程≥VGPR率及CR率较2个疗程的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),而原研硼替佐米组6个疗程OR率、≥VGPR率、CR率较4个疗程的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),可能与国产硼替佐米组6个疗程病例数较少相关,需扩大样本量进一步研究。值得注意的是,本研究中伴17p-细胞遗传学异常患者的β2微球蛋白均>5.5 mg/L,故所有17p-细胞遗传学改变的患者均属于R-ISS Ⅲ期,虽然原研硼替佐米组R-ISS Ⅲ期患者较国产硼替佐组多,但短期疗效的差异无统计学意义。对于高危细胞遗传学异常患者而言,原研硼替佐米是否更具优势仍需进一步扩大样本量。 本研究中,原研硼替佐米组周围神经病变、血小板减少发生率与Richardson等[10]、Lonial等[11]的报道结果相近,而消化系统症状、中性粒细胞减少、感染等发生率减低,可能与我们提前对MM患者进行并发症宣教、有效的肠道管理、及时应用抗病毒药物相关。国产硼替佐米组周围神经病变发生率与原研硼替佐米组相比差异无统计学意义,与蔡惠丽等[8]的报道一致。值得注意的是,本研究中两组患者皮疹的发生率均明显高于Richardson等[12]的研究,需要进一步扩大样本量进行研究。本研究未发现硼替佐米的心脏及肾脏不良反应。 本研究结果显示,国产硼替佐米与原研硼替佐米的疗效及不良反应差异无统计学意义。本研究为回顾性研究,在资料的完整性及研究对象的选择方面具有一定的局限性,且样本量较小、随访时间较短,未进行生存分析,因此国产硼替佐米的有效性和安全性还需要大样本前瞻性随机对照临床试验提供循证医学依据。

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Bortezomib with thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with thalidomide plus dexamethasone as induction therapy before, and consolidation therapy after, double autologous stem-cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a randomised phase 3 study.

          Thalidomide plus dexamethasone (TD) is a standard induction therapy for myeloma. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of addition of bortezomib to TD (VTD) versus TD alone as induction therapy before, and consolidation therapy after, double autologous stem-cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Patients (aged 18-65 years) with previously untreated symptomatic myeloma were enrolled from 73 sites in Italy between May, 2006, and April, 2008, and data collection continued until June 30, 2010. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) by a web-based system to receive three 21-day cycles of thalidomide (100 mg daily for the first 14 days and 200 mg daily thereafter) plus dexamethasone (40 mg daily on 8 of the first 12 days, but not consecutively; total of 320 mg per cycle), either alone or with bortezomib (1·3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11). The randomisation sequence was computer generated by the study coordinating team and was stratified by disease stage. After double autologous stem-cell transplantation, patients received two 35-day cycles of their assigned drug regimen, VTD or TD, as consolidation therapy. The primary endpoint was the rate of complete or near complete response to induction therapy. Analysis was by intention to treat. Patients and treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. This study is still underway but is not recruiting participants, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01134484, and with EudraCT, number 2005-003723-39. 480 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive VTD (n=241 patients) or TD (n=239). Six patients withdrew consent before start of treatment, and 236 on VTD and 238 on TD were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. After induction therapy, complete or near complete response was achieved in 73 patients (31%, 95% CI 25·0-36·8) receiving VTD, and 27 (11%, 7·3-15·4) on TD (p<0·0001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded in a significantly higher number of patients on VTD (n=132, 56%) than in those on TD (n=79, 33%; p<0·0001), with a higher occurrence of peripheral neuropathy in patients on VTD (n=23, 10%) than in those on TD (n=5, 2%; p=0·0004). Resolution or improvement of severe peripheral neuropathy was recorded in 18 of 23 patients on VTD, and in three of five patients on TD. VTD induction therapy before double autologous stem-cell transplantation significantly improves rate of complete or near complete response, and represents a new standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma who are eligible for transplant. Seràgnoli Institute of Haematology at the University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Reversibility of symptomatic peripheral neuropathy with bortezomib in the phase III APEX trial in relapsed multiple myeloma: impact of a dose-modification guideline.

            The frequency, characteristics and reversibility of bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy were evaluated in the phase III APEX (Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions) trial in patients with relapsed myeloma, and the impact of a dose-modification guideline on peripheral neuropathy severity and reversibility was assessed. Patients received bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) (days 1, 4, 8, 11, eight 21-d cycles, then days 1, 8, 15, 22, three 35-d cycles); bortezomib was held, dose-reduced or discontinued depending on peripheral neuropathy severity, according to a protocol-specified dose-modification guideline. Overall, 124/331 patients (37%) had treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy, including 30 (9%) with grade >or=3; incidence and severity were not affected by age, number/type of prior therapies, baseline glycosylated haemoglobin level, or diabetes history. Grade >or=3 incidence appeared lower versus phase II trials (13%) that did not specifically provide dose-modification guidelines. Of patients with grade >or=2 peripheral neuropathy, 58/91 (64%) experienced improvement or resolution to baseline at a median of 110 d, including 49/72 (68%) who had dose modification versus 9/19 (47%) who did not. Efficacy did not appear adversely affected by dose modification for grade >or=2 peripheral neuropathy. Bortezomib-associated peripheral neuropathy is manageable and reversible in most patients with relapsed myeloma. Dose modification using a specific guideline improves peripheral neuropathy management without adversely affecting outcome.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Characterisation of haematological profiles and low risk of thromboembolic events with bortezomib in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma.

              Haematological toxicities and thromboembolic (TE) events are common complications of myeloma therapy. TE risk may be elevated with combination regimens, notably thalidomide/lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone; concomitant erythropoietin appears to further increase the risk with lenalidomide-dexamethasone. We characterised thrombocytopenia and neutropenia in the phase 3 APEX (Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions) study of bortezomib versus high-dose dexamethasone in relapsed myeloma, and calculated the incidences of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE) with: bortezomib or dexamethasone +/- erythropoietin in APEX; bortezomib +/- dexamethasone +/- erythropoietin in two phase 2 studies of relapsed/refractory myeloma. Bortezomib-associated thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were transient, predictable and manageable; mean platelet and neutrophil counts followed a cyclical pattern, and improved over the treatment course. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia incidence was higher with bortezomib versus dexamethasone (26%/4% vs. 5%/1%), but significant bleeding events were comparable (4% vs. 5%). DVT/PE incidence was low (< or =3.1%) in all analyses; addition of dexamethasone/erythropoietin did not affect TE risk. In APEX, TE risk appeared lower with bortezomib versus dexamethasone. Bortezomib caused transient and cyclical thrombocytopenia and was not associated with elevated TE risk, alone or with dexamethasone +/- erythropoietin. Preliminary data suggest bortezomib may reduce the thrombogenic potential of combination regimens via inhibition of platelet function or other mechanism-specific effects on coagulation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi
                Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi
                CJH
                Chinese Journal of Hematology
                Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology (No. 288, Nanjing road, Heping district, Tianjin )
                0253-2727
                2707-9740
                March 2020
                : 41
                : 3
                : 261-263
                Affiliations
                [1 ]河南省人民医院,河南省国际医疗中心,郑州大学人民医院,河南大学人民医院 450000Henan Provincial People's Hospital, International Medical Center of Henan, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, Zhengzhou 450000, China
                [2 ]郑州大学第一附属医院血液科 450000Department of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450000, China
                [3 ]新乡医学院第一附属医院血液科,卫辉 453100Department of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical College, Weihui 453100, China
                [4 ]河南大学淮河医院血液科,开封 475000Department of Hematology, Huaihe Hospital of Henan University, Kaifeng 475000, China
                Author notes
                通信作者:姜中兴(Jiang Zhongxing),Email: jiangzx313@ 123456126.com
                Article
                cjh-41-03-261
                10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2020.03.015
                7357932
                32311900
                34ef3ec0-4d7a-4ff8-8f7e-c1d75653f75b
                2020年版权归中华医学会所有Copyright © 2020 by Chinese Medical Association

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (CC-BY-NC). The Copyright own by Publisher. Without authorization, shall not reprint, except this publication article, shall not use this publication format design. Unless otherwise stated, all articles published in this journal do not represent the views of the Chinese Medical Association or the editorial board of this journal.

                History
                : 30 August 2019
                Funding
                基金项目:国家自然科学基金青年项目(81700138)
                Categories
                经验交流

                Comments

                Comment on this article