4.1 Article

Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone treatment in Japanese patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEMATOLOGY
Volume 92, Issue 1, Pages 118-126

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s12185-010-0624-7

Keywords

Multiple myeloma; Lenalidomide; Dexamethasone; Pharmacokinetics

Categories

Funding

  1. Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.
  2. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
  3. Janssen Pharmaceutical
  4. Novartis Pharma

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We conducted a multicenter, open-label study to investigate the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of lenalidomide in Japanese patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma The study was composed of the monotherapy phase, a dose-escalation phase, to determine the tolerability to single agent lenalidomide and the combination phase to determine the safety and obtain preliminary data on the efficacy of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone. The primary end points were the tolerability to 25 mg lenalidomide and safety. Nine and six patients were enrolled in the monotherapy phase and the combination phase, respectively. Since 25 mg of monotherapy treatment did not satisfy the DLT criteria, this dose was employed in the combination phase. The major adverse event was myelosuppression. At the planned interim analysis (median study duration, 26.3 weeks), grade 3 or grade 4 neutropenia was observed with high frequency (66.7%). However, all adverse events observed were clinically manageable. In the combination cohort, the overall response rate (a parts per thousand yenPR) was 100%. The pharmacokinetics of lenalidomide showed rapid absorption and elimination after both single and multiple doses. In conclusion, 25 mg of lenalidomide was given safely as a single agent or in combination with dexamethasone in Japanese patients. The good efficacy of the combination therapy was also demonstrated in this study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available