Benson, Don M.

Maintenance therapy after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM) is the standard treatment and recommended to be continued until disease progression. However, in the real world, patients discontinue treatment due to various reasons. We sought to determine the effect of early versus late discontinuation on survival outcomes in MM patients who underwent ASCT at The Ohio State University. We retrospectively reviewed 340 patients who underwent ASCT from 2005 to 2016 and received maintenance therapy for at least six months without progression. We compared the outcomes of patients who received maintenance for three years or less (early group) to the patients who continued maintenance beyond three years (late group). Lenalidomide (89%) and bortezomib (10%) were the most common agents used for maintenance chemotherapy. In Kaplan–Meier analysis, patients in the late group had prolonged progression-free (PFS) (p < 0.001) and overall survival (OS) (p < 0.001). The 5-year estimated OS in late group was 96% vs. 79% in the early group and 5-year PFS was 80% in late group vs. 50% in the early group. The most common reasons for discontinuation of maintenance in early group were adverse events (55.9%) and patient preference (22.5%). For the late group, it was disease progression (23.9%) and adverse events (14.3%). Fifty-five percent of patients in the late group were still on maintenance treatment at the last follow-up. Continuation of maintenance therapy was thus associated with improved outcomes, while adverse events prevented most patients from continuing treatment.

BACKGROUND Recombinant interleukin‐2 (rIL‐2) induces cellular cytotoxicity against leukemia blasts. Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in first complete remission (CR) may harbor minimal residual disease that is susceptible to rIL‐2–activated effector cells. METHODS In the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 19808 study, patients with AML in first CR were randomly assigned after all planned chemotherapy to receive a 90‐day course of subcutaneously administered rIL‐2 or no further therapy. The primary objective was to compare disease‐free survival (DFS) between the 2 treatment arms. A total of 534 patients achieved a CR, 214 of whom were randomized. Six courses of low‐dose daily rIL‐2 were given for the expansion of cytotoxic effector cells, each followed by 3‐day high‐dose boluses given to trigger cytotoxicity against minimal residual disease. RESULTS On the protocol‐specified intention‐to‐treat analysis, the hazards ratio for DFS was 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.52‐1.09; P = .13); the 5‐year DFS rate was 42% in the observation arm and 53% in the rIL‐2 treatment arm. The hazards ratio for overall survival (OS) was 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.54‐1.23; P = .34); the 5‐year OS rate was 58% for the observation arm and 63% for the rIL‐2 treatment arm. Twenty‐five of the 107 patients randomized to treatment with rIL‐2 either refused or were unable to initiate therapy and 30 patients did not complete their assigned therapy. However, significant toxicities were not commonly observed. The trial design did not anticipate the difficulties patients would encounter with protocol compliance. CONCLUSIONS The efficacy of immunotherapy with rIL‐2 administered after intensive postremission treatment was not assessed as planned because of unexpected refusals by patients and/or their physicians to comply with protocol‐directed therapy. Neither DFS nor OS was found to be significantly improved. Cancer 2014;120:1010–1017 . © 2013 American Cancer Society .