Mieloma Guidelines

GUIDELINES FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND MANAGEMENT OF MULTIPLE MYELOMA 2013
Jenny M. Bird1, Roger G. Owen2, Shirley D’Sa3, John A. Snowden4, Guy Pratt5, John Ashcroft6, Kwee
Yong7, Gordon Cook8, Sylvia Feyler9, Faith Davies10, Gareth Morgan11, Jamie Cavenagh12, Eric Low13,
Judith Behrens14 Matthew Jenner15 on behalf of the Haemato-oncology Task Force of the
British Committee for Standards in Haematology (BCSH), UK Myeloma Forum
Address for correspondence: Jenny Bird, c/o BCSH Secretary, British Society for Haematology,
100, White Lion Street, London, N1 9PF
e-mail: bcsh@b-s-h.org.uk
Correspondence prior to publication only:
Dr J M Bird
Avon Haematology Unit
Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre
Horfield Road
BRISTOL
BS2 8ED
Tel: 0117 342 4394

Fax: 0117 342 4036
E-Mail: jenny.bird@uhbristol.nhs.uk
Acknowledgments
This guideline document was produced with the help of an educational grant from Myeloma UK.
Disclaimer
While the advice and information in these guidelines is believed to be true and accurate at the time
of going to press, neither the authors, the UK Myeloma Forum (UKMF), the British Society for
Haematology (BSH) nor the publishers accept any legal responsibility for the content of these
guidelines.
Annual review of recommendation updates will be undertaken and any altered recommendations
posted on the websites of the British Committee for Standards in Haematology
(http://www.bcshguidelines.com/) and UKMF (http://www.ukmf.org.uk/)
________________________________________________________________
1. Avon Haematology Unit, Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre, Bristol
2. Department of Haematology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
3. Department of Haematology, University College Hospital, London
4. Department of Haematology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
5. Department of Haematology, Heart of England NHS Trust, Birmingham
7. Department of Haematology, University College Hospital, London
2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 1 of 99

9. Department of Haematology, Calderdale and Huddersfield NHS Trust
10. Haemato-oncology Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, London
11. Haemato-oncology Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, London
12. Department of Haematology, St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, London
13. Myeloma UK, Edinburgh
14. Department of Haematology, St Helier Hospital, Carshalton, Surrey
15. Department of Haematology, University hospital Southampton
Key Words: myeloma, myeloma therapy, lymphoid malignancies, malignant haematology,

laboratory haematology, immunoglobulin

This guideline is an update of the 2010 BCSH ‘Diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma’
guideline. It should be in conjunction with the BCSH guideline ‘Supportive care in multiple myeloma’.
The contents of ‘Diagnosis and management of multiple myeloma’ are listed below:
1 Methodology, epidemiology and clinical presentation
2 Diagnosis, prognostic factors and disease monitoring
3 Imaging techniques in myeloma
4 Management of common medical emergencies in myeloma patients
5 Myeloma bone disease
6 Renal impairment
7 Induction therapy including management of major toxicities and stem cell harvesting
8 Management of refractory disease
9 High dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation
10 Allogeneic stem cell transplantation
11 Maintenance therapy
12 Management of relapsed myeloma including drugs in development
13 Patient Information and Support
The key areas that are covered comprehensively in the document entitled ‘Guidelines for Supportive
Care in Multiple Myeloma 2011’ (Snowden et al 2011) are listed below:
• Anaemia
• Haemostasis and thrombosis issues
• Pain management
• Peripheral neuropathy
• Other symptom control – gastrointestinal, sedation/fatigue, mucositis
• Bisphosphonate-induced osteonecrosis of the jaw
• Complementary therapies
• End of life care
1. Methodology, epidemiology and clinical presentation
1.1 Methodology
The production of these guidelines involved the following steps:

• Establishment of working groups in the topic areas detailed above followed by review of key
literature to April 2013 including Cochrane database, Medline, internet searches and major
conference reports

• Development of key recommendations based on randomized, controlled trial evidence. In the
absence of randomized data, recommendations were developed on the basis of literature review
and
a consensus of expert opinion
• Involvement of patient advocacy through Myeloma UK
• Review by UK Myeloma Forum (UKMF) Executive and British Committee for Standards in
Haematology (BCSH) Committees
• Review by a British Society for Haematology (BSH) sounding board
Levels of evidence and grades of recommendation have been updated using the GRADE (Grading of
Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) nomenclature for assessing the quality
of evidence and providing strength of recommendations
(http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/index.htm). In preparing these guidelines the authors have
considered overall cost-effectiveness of recommended interventions as well as clinical efficacy data
but formal health economic assessments have not been carried out.
1.2 Incidence, prevalence and epidemiology
The annual incidence of myeloma in the UK is approximately 60-70 per million

(http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/multiplemyeloma/incidence/index.htm). The
overall prevalence is likely to be increasing given the recently published data demonstrating
improved survival rates over the last decade (Brenner et al, 2009; Kumar et al, 2008a). The median
age at presentation is approximately 70 years. Only 15% of patients are aged less than 60 years.
Myeloma has a higher incidence in Afro-Caribbean ethnic groups than in Caucasians but there are
few other distinctive epidemiological features. The majority of cases present de novo but it is now
recognized that myeloma is preceded by an asymptomatic monoclonal gammopathy of
undetermined significance (MGUS) phase in virtually all patients (Landgren et al, 2009).
1.3 Clinical Presentation
Presenting clinical features include symptoms of:

• Bone disease
• Impaired renal function
• Anaemia
• Hypercalcaemia
• Recurrent or persistent bacterial infection
• Hyperviscosity
Other patients are diagnosed following the incidental detection of a raised erythrocyte
sedimentation rate (ESR), plasma viscosity, serum protein or globulin. Patients with suspected
myeloma require urgent specialist referral. Spinal cord compression, hypercalcaemia and renal
failure are medical emergencies requiring immediate investigation and treatment. The investigation
and management of asymptomatic patients found to have an M-protein are discussed in the
UKMF/BCSH MGUS guidelines (Bird et al, 2009).
2. Diagnosis, prognostic factors and disease monitoring

2.1 Investigation and diagnosis
Investigation of a patient with suspected myeloma should include the screening tests indicated in
Table 1, followed by further tests to confirm the diagnosis. Electrophoresis of serum and
concentrated urine should be performed, followed by immunofixation to confirm and type any M-
protein present. Immunofixation and serum-free light chain (SFLC) assessment are indicated in
patients where there is a strong suspicion of myeloma but in whom routine serum protein
electrophoresis is negative (Pratt 2008).
Quantification of serum M-protein should be performed by densitometry of the monoclonal peak on
electrophoresis; immunochemical measurement of total immunoglobulin (Ig) isotype level can also
be used and is particularly useful for IgA and IgD M-proteins. Quantification of urinary total protein
and light chain excretion can be performed directly on a 24-h urine collection or calculated on a
random urine sample in relation to the urine creatinine.
Quantification of SFLC levels and κ/λ ratio is an additional tool for the assessment of light chain
production. The serum tests are particularly useful for diagnosis and monitoring of light chain only
myeloma (Bradwell et al, 2003) and patients with oligosecretory / non-secretory disease (see Table
2) (Drayson et al, 2001) and in requests for which urine has not been sent to the laboratory. In renal
impairment the half-life, and thus serum concentration of SFLC, can increase ten-fold and there is
often an increased κ/λratio (Hutchison et al, 2008). A diagnosis of myeloma should be confirmed by
bone marrow (BM) assessment. It is recommended that an adequate trephine biopsy of at least 20
mm in length be obtained in all patients as it provides a better assessment of the extent of marrow
infiltration than aspirate smears (Al-Quran et al, 2007; Ng et al, 2006).
It is recommended that a diagnosis of myeloma be confirmed by the demonstration of an aberrant
plasma cell phenotype and / or monoclonality. Plasma cell phenotyping may be performed by flow
cytometry and / or immunohistochemistry on trephine sections. The European Myeloma Network
have provided practical guidance on the optimal methods for flow cytometry (Rawstron et al, 2008)
and rapid and cost effective single-tube assays have been developed (Rawstron et al, 2008). CD138
immunostaining of trephine sections can be useful to determine the extent of infiltration in selected
cases (Al-Quran et al, 2007; Ng et al, 2006). All diagnoses should be made or reviewed by an
appropriately constituted Multidisciplinary Team (MDT) ( National Institute for Health and Clinical
Excellence [NICE], 2003). Cytogenetic and radiological investigations are discussed in sections 2.4
and 3, respectively.

2.2 Diagnostic criteria and differential diagnosis
A diagnosis of myeloma should be made using the criteria proposed in 2003 by the International
Myeloma Working Group (IMWG), which are detailed in Table 2.
These criteria distinguish between myeloma and MGUS principally on the basis of M-protein
concentration, percentage of BM plasma cells and presence or absence of myeloma-related organ
and tissue impairment (ROTI, Table 3). Other differential diagnoses in patients with M-proteins
include solitary plasmacytoma and other B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders. Detailed guidance on
the diagnosis and management of solitary plasmacytoma and MGUS are provided in recently
published UKMF/BCSH guidelines (Hughes et al, 2009; Bird et al, 2009).
Recommendations (all Grade A1)
• IMWG diagnostic criteria should be used

• Investigation should be based on the tests shown in Table 1 including an assessment of
possible myeloma-related organ and tissue impairment
• All diagnoses should be made or reviewed by an appropriately constituted MDT
• Plasma cell phenotyping by flow cytometry and / or immunohistochemistry on trephine biopsy
sections is recommended in all cases
2.3 Monitoring and indications for starting therapy
Chemotherapy is indicated for the management of symptomatic myeloma defined by the presence of
ROTI. Early intervention in patients with asymptomatic myeloma is not required (Hjorth et al, 1993;
Riccardi et al, 2000) although chemotherapy may be considered in patients with a rising M-protein
concentration in the absence of ROTI. Patients with asymptomatic myeloma require close
monitoring under the supervision of a Consultant Haematologist.
The overall risk of progression is 10% per year for the first 5 years but, interestingly, declines in
subsequent years (Kyle et al, 2007). The SFLC ratio (<0.125 or >8) appears to be predictive of
outcome and a risk score incorporating BM plasma cell percentage, M-protein concentration and
SFLC ratio has been proposed (Dispenzieri et al, 2008). Flow cytometry is also predictive of
outcome as the risk of progression is significantly greater when aberrant phenotype plasma cells
determined by flow cytometry comprise >95% of total BM plasma cells (Perez-Persona et al, 2007).
Recommendations
• Chemotherapy is only indicated in patients with symptomatic myeloma based on the presence
of ROTI (Grade C2)

• Patients with asymptomatic myeloma should be monitored under the supervision of a
Consultant Haematologist. These patients should be offered entry into clinical trials if available.
(Grade A1)
• Monitoring of patients with asymptomatic myeloma should include regular (typically 3-
monthly) clinical assessment for the emergence of ROTI and measurement of serum and urinary M-
protein (and SFLC when indicated). Repeat BM examination and skeletal imaging should be
considered prior to the start of treatment (Grade A1)
2.4 Prognostic factors and staging in symptomatic myeloma
The natural history of myeloma is heterogeneous with survival times ranging from a few weeks to
>20 years. Analysis of prognostic factors is essential to compare outcomes within and between
clinical trials. The Durie/Salmon staging system was published in 1975 (Durie and Salmon 1975) but
has been superseded by the International Staging System (ISS) reproduced in Table 4 (Greipp, et al
2005). This defines 3 risk categories determined by the serum concentration of Β2-microglobulin
and albumin. The use of staging systems to determine choice of therapy for individual patients
remains unproven.
Certain cytogenetic and molecular genetic abnormalities have been shown to predict outcome in
myeloma. It is now generally accepted that both the immunoglobulin heavy chain gene translocations
t(4;14), t(14;16) and t(14;20) as well as the copy number changes 1q gain and 17p deletion,
demonstrated by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), confer an adverse outcome in myeloma.
It has therefore been proposed that these abnormalities define “high-risk” myeloma and should be
specifically sought at diagnosis in all patients (Fonseca, et al 2009, Munshi, et al 2011). Recent data
suggests that chromosome 13 deletion is not an independent prognostic marker and the adverse
effect relates to its close association with high-risk abnormalities, particularly the t(4;14). There is
now consensus that conventional karyotyping has little or no added value in the routine setting
(Fonseca, et al 2009). The European Myeloma Network have outlined the technical aspects of FISH
testing in myeloma and related disorders and recommended the essential abnormalities to be tested
for are t(4;14), t(14;16) and 17p13 deletions as well as 1p and 1q abnormalities where possible
(Ross, et al 2012).
Data from the MRC Myeloma IX trial has been used to define risk groups based on the presence or
absence of multiple adverse FISH lesions and to combine these with the ISS. This is able to identify
an ultra-high-risk group defined by ISS II or III and >1 adverse lesion, associated with a short PFS
(Boyd, et al 2012). This information is helpful to inform clinical discussions with patients about
anticipated longer term outcome. There is increasing data to suggest that the adverse effect of
genetic factors may at least in part be overcome by newer agents (Avet-Loiseau, et al 2010,

Sonneveld, et al 2012) and some centres propose a treatment approach based on genetic risk
stratification with an emphasis on bortezomib-based induction for high risk myeloma (Kumar, et al
2009). Whilst there is now international consensus about the need to undertake FISH analysis at
diagnosis (Kyle and Rajkumar 2009) there is not yet international consensus as to the optimal
treatment approach for different risk groups and further studies for high risk myeloma are required.
Nonetheless using cytogenetics as a biological risk assessment is likely to assist in treatment
decisions in the future as further evidence is generated about the optimal treatment for a given
group of patients Next generation sequencing is able to identify copy number alternations,
translocations and somatic mutations in myeloma cases (Chapman, et al 2011) and is likely to
succeed FISH testing in the future.
A number of groups have used gene expression profiling to define risk in both newly diagnosed and
relapsed patients (Shaughnessy, et al 2007) and DNA arrays to identify copy number abnormalities in
newly diagnosed myeloma (Avet-Loiseau, et al 2009, Walker, et al 2010) but their role in
determining treatment decisions in routine clinical practice is yet to be defined. Baseline SFLC
concentration may also provide useful prognostic information (Dispenzieri, et al 2008) as may the
immunoglobulin heavy/light chain ratios both at diagnosis and following treatment (Ludwig, et al
2010). The presence or absence of neoplastic plasma cells identified by multiparameter flow
cytometry following treatment is also predicitive of long term outcome in both intensively and non-
intensively treated patients (Paiva, et al 2012, Paiva, et al 2008). It is essential that new prognostic
indicators continue to be evaluated in prospective clinical trials to determine the role for these in
the future stratification of myeloma treatment.
Recommendations (all Grade C1)

• The International Staging System based on serum albumin and β2-microglobulin should be used
• FISH studies are recommended for all patients at diagnosis as they provide important
prognostic information but their role in directing therapy needs further evaluation in
prospective clinical trials
• Newer techniques for prognostic assessment should continue to be utilised in the context of
clinical trials to evaluate future incorporation in to routine clinical practice.
2.5 Measuring Response to Therapy
The European Group for Blood and Bone Marrow Transplant / International Bone Marrow
Transplant Registry / American Bone Marrow Transplant Registry (EBMT/IBMTR/ABMTR) criteria
(Blade et al, 1998) were updated by the IMWG in 2006 (Durie et al, 2006) and further modifications

were subsequently proposed (Rajkumar & Kyle, 2009; Rajkumar et al, 2010). The uniform response
criteria are detailed in Table 5.
There are two new response categories, stringent complete response (sCR) and very good partial
response (VGPR). The criteria now incorporate changes in the SFLC assay but only for those
patients with non-quantifiable serum or urine M-proteins defined as a serum M-protein of <10g/l
and/ or urinary M-protein of <200 mg/24 h. In routine clinical practice there is a clear rationale for
utilising the SFLC assay to assess response in light chain only disease, irrespective of the extent of
light chain excretion in the urine (Pratt 2008). The response category ‘sCR’ (for use in the reporting
of clinical trials) has been refined recently to incorporate the use of flow cytometry to detect
minimal residual disease on the basis of the presence of an aberrant immunophenotype (Rajkumar et
al, 2011). Low levels of residual disease may also be demonstrated using allele-specific polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) and a further new category of molecular CR is proposed, which is defined as
the absence of disease by sequence specific PCR methods with a sensitivity of 10-5.
Delayed achievement of complete remission (CR) is seen in a significant proportion of patients
following high-dose therapy (Davies et al, 2001). The majority of such patients will have IgG M-
proteins which have a half-life of approximately 23 days, significantly longer than that of IgA (6 days)
and free light chains (4 h) (Mead et al, 2004).
Repeat BM aspirate assessment is required to confirm CR (repeat trephine biopsy is not required
under the response criteria but may be needed for accurate assessment) (Durie et al, 2006) and
should be performed in all patients at Day 100 following high-dose therapy in accordance with
EBMT standards. Flow cytometric assessment of minimal residual disease at this time point also
provides prognostic information (Paiva et al, 2008) and may in the future be used to guide
maintenance / consolidation therapies. The definitions of progressive disease and relapse have also
been revised by the IMWG (table 6) and include a new category of clinical relapse, which reflects
the fact that progressive disease (PD) as defined does not necessarily indicate a need for further
therapy.
Note - in patients in whom the only measurable disease (for definitions see below) is by SFLC assay,
CR is defined by negative immunofixation and a normal SFLC ratio, VGPR is defined by >90% decrease
in the difference between the involved and uninvolved free light chain concentrations and PR by a
>50% decrease in the difference between involved and uninvolved SFLC levels. If SFLC assay is also
uninformative, PR is defined by >50% reduction in BM plasma cells provided baseline BM plasma cell
percentage was >30%. In addition to the above listed criteria, if present at baseline, a >50% reduction
in the size of soft tissue plasmacytomas is also required.
Definitions of measurable disease

Response criteria for all categories and subcategories of response except CR are applicable only to
patients who have ‘measurable’ disease defined by at least one of the following three measurements:
• Serum M-protein > >10 g/l
• Urine M-protein >200 mg/24 h
• SFLC assay: Involved FLC level >>100 mg/l provided SFLC ratio is abnormal
Recommendations (all Grade B1)
• Response to therapy should be defined using the IMWG uniform response criteria
• The response category sCR is recommended only for use in the clinical trial setting
• The SFLC assay should be used to assess response in all patients with light chain only, non
secretory and oligosecretory disease
2.6 Rare myelomas
The rare myelomas comprise up to 7% of all myelomas and consist of plasma cell leukaemia, IgD,
IgE, IgM and non-secretory myeloma.
Plasma Cell Leukaemia

Plasma cell leukaemia (PCL) may be primary or secondary to multiple myeloma and is characterized
by the presence of >20% circulating plasma cells and/or an absolute level of > 2.0 x 109/l (Kyle et al,
1974).
IgD, E and M Myelomas

IgD myeloma may comprise up to 1.8% of all myelomas (Blade and Kyle 1994; Wechalekar et al,
2005). Diagnosis may be difficult because some patients may present with a very small or no visible
monoclonal spike on serum electrophoresis. Care must be exercised to avoid a false diagnosis of
non-secretory or light chain only myeloma (Sinclair 2002).The clinical features are similar to that of
other myelomas but Bence-Jones proteinuria, extramedullary involvement, lytic lesions and
amyloidosis seem to be more frequent (Jancelewicz et al, 1975). Relatively few cases of IgE myeloma
have been reported in the literature (Endo et al, 1981; Kairemo et al, 1999) Morris et al, in press).
There may be clinical similarities with IgD myeloma and in both conditions the prognosis appears to
be poor (Morris et al, in press). With the increased use of BM trephine biopsies and improved
immunohistomorphology (Feyler et al, 2008; Konduri et al, 2005), IgM myelomas are being
recognized more frequently and may comprise up to 0.4% of all myelomas (Morris et al, in press). It
is important that such cases are distinguished from other IgM secreting disorders, particularly
Waldenstrom macroglobulinaemia (Avet-Loiseau et al, 2003a). There is a high incidence of the
t(11;14) and prognosis appears to be poor (Avet-Loiseau et al, 2003b; Feyler et al, 2008; Morris et al,
in press).

Non-secretory myeloma
Non-secretory myeloma poses particular diagnostic difficulties as there is no serum M-protein and
no urinary Bence-Jones protein excretion. The SFLC assay is informative in approximately two
thirds of patients (Drayson et al, 2001). While the clinical presentation is essentially similar to
standard myeloma, anaemia and lytic lesions may be seen more frequently while renal failure is
uncommon (Morris et al, in press).
3 Imaging techniques
Significant advances in available imaging technologies have paralleled developments in

therapy for myeloma and may play a more prominent role in determining prognosis in
the future (Durie 2006). A detailed guideline for the use of imaging in myeloma has
been published (D'Sa et al, 2007). Key recommendations are summarized below.
Recommendations
• The skeletal survey remains the screening technique of choice at diagnosis. (Grade B1)
• The skeletal survey should include a postero-anterior (PA) view of the chest, antero-
posterior (AP) and lateral views of the cervical spine, thoracic spine, lumbar spine, humeri
and femora, AP and lateral view of the skull and AP view of the pelvis; other symptomatic
areas should be specifically visualized with appropriate views (Grade B1)
• Computerized tomography (CT) scanning or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) should be
used to clarify the significance of ambiguous plain radiographic findings, such as equivocal
lytic lesions, especially in parts of the skeleton that are difficult to visualize on plain
radiographs, such as ribs, sternum and scapulae (Grade A1)
• Urgent MRI is the diagnostic procedure of choice to assess suspected cord compression in
myeloma patients with or without vertebral collapse. Urgent CT scanning is an alternative,
when MRI is unavailable, intolerable or contraindicated.
• CT or MRI is indicated to delineate the nature and extent of soft tissue masses and where
appropriate, tissue biopsy may be guided by CT scanning (Grade A1)
• There is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of positron-emission tomography
(PET) or 99mTechnetium sestamibi (MIBI) imaging. Either technique may be useful in selected
cases for clarification of previous imaging findings preferably within the context of a clinical
trial (Grade C2)
• Bone scintigraphy has no place in the routine staging of myeloma (Grade A1)
• Routine assessment of bone mineral density cannot be recommended, owing to the
methodological difficulties of the technique and the universal use of bisphosphonates in all
symptomatic myeloma patients (Grade A1).

4 Management of common medical emergencies in myeloma patients
4.1 Hyperviscosity
Hyperviscosity syndrome may develop in patients with high serum paraprotein levels,
particularly those of IgA and IgG3 type. Symptoms include blurred vision, headaches,
mucosal bleeding and dyspnoea due to heart failure.
All patients with high protein levels should undergo fundoscopy, which may
demonstrate retinal vein distension, haemorrhages and papilloedema. Patients usually
have raised plasma viscosity and symptoms commonly appear when it exceeds 4 or 5
mPa. This usually corresponds to a serum IgM level of at least 30 g/l, an IgA level of 40
g/l and an IgG level of 60 g/l (Mehta and Singhal 2003). Plasma viscosity results should
not be used to determine the need for plasma exchange as this may result in delay but
testing should be carried out both before and after the procedure. Symptomatic
patients should be treated urgently with plasma exchange; isovolaemic venesection
may be useful if plasma exchange facilities are not immediately available. If transfusion
is essential, exchange transfusion should be performed. The need for further exchanges
over the next few days should be determined by symptoms and requirement for blood
transfusion. Rapid reduction of protein levels is mandatory and anti-myeloma
treatment should be instituted promptly.
Recommendations
• Symptomatic hyperviscosity should be treated with therapeutic plasma exchange with saline
fluid replacement (Grade A1)
• If plasmapheresis is not immediately available but hyperviscosity symptoms are present,
consider isovolaemic venesection with saline replacement as a holding measure (Grade A1)
• Effective treatment of the underlying disease should be started as soon as possible (Grade A1)
4.2 Hypercalcaemia
Up to 30% of myeloma patients present with hypercalcaemia occurring mostly in the

context of active disease. Acute hypercalcaemia can present with central nervous
system dysfunction (confusion, coma and obtundation), muscle weakness, pancreatitis,
constipation, thirst, polyuria, shortening of the Q-T interval on electrocardiogram and
acute renal insufficiency. Alternative causes of hypercalcaemia should be considered eg.
hyperparathyroidism. Treatment of the underlying disease should be initiated as soon
as possible along with active treatment of hypercalcaemia to minimize long-term renal
damage. The mainstays of treatment are hydration and intravenous bisphosphonates.

Mild hypercalcaemia (corrected calcium 2.6-2.9 mmol/l) may be corrected with oral and/or
intravenous rehydration. Moderate to severe hypercalcaemia (corrected calcium ≥ 2.9mmol/l)
requires intravenous rehydration with normal saline. Adequate urine output should be ensured and
use of intravenous loop diuretics, such as furosemide, should be considered to avoid volume
overload and heart failure and promote urinary calcium excretion.
All patients with moderate to severe hypercalcaemia should receive a bisphosphonate.

A randomized controlled trial in patients with hypercalcaemia of malignancy has shown
that zoledronic acid is superior to pamidronate (Major et al, 2001). If the calcium
remains high after 72 h a further dose of zoledronic acid may be given. Dose
modifications are required in renal impairment and reduced dose pamidronate (30mg)
may be more appropriate in patients with severe renal impairment (see Appendix 2).
Patients with refractory hypercalcaemia may require corticosteroids and calcitonin.
Recommendations (mostly grade C; level III evidence)
• in mild hypercalcaemia (corrected calcium 2.6-2.9 mmol/l) re-hydrate with oral and /or iv
fluids (Grade A1)
• in moderate-severe hypercalcaemia (corrected calcium >2.9 mmol/l) re-hydrate with

intravenous fluids and give furosemide if required (Grade B1)
• zoledronic acid is the bisphosphonate of choice in the treatment of hypercalcaemia (Grade

B1)
4.3 Cord compression
Compression of the spinal cord from extramedullary foci of disease occurs in 5% of patients with
myeloma during the course of their disease (Kyle et al, 2003). Clinical features depend on the nature
of the cord compression (due to bony / structural lesion or to soft tissue disease), the spinal level,
extent of disease and the rate of development of cord compression, but commonly include sensory
loss, paraesthesiae, limb weakness, walking difficulty and sphincter disturbance. This is a medical
emergency requiring rapid diagnosis and treatment. Upon clinical suspicion of cord compression,
dexamethasone 40 mg daily for 4 days should be commenced and MRI obtained as soon as possible.
Where MRI is unavailable or impossible due to patient intolerance or contraindication, an
urgent CT scan should be performed. The differentiation between soft tissue and bone-related
cord compression is essential and should be discussed with neurosurgery/orthopaedic teams
(depending on local expertise) immediately if there is any question about the need for surgical
intervention.
Surgery is usually undertaken for emergency decompression in the setting of structural compression
and/or to stabilize the spine and is usually consolidated by post-operative radiotherapy. For soft
tissue disease local radiotherapy is the treatment of choice and should be commenced urgently,
preferably within 24 hours of the diagnosis of cord compression. There are no randomized
controlled trials to give guidance on optimal radiotherapy dose and fractionation but a retrospective
multi-centre study of 172 myeloma patients has been published and demonstrated a better overall
outcome in terms of improvement in motor function for patients treated with at least 30 Gy (Rades
et al, 2006).
Recommendations
• Urgent MRI should be performed and neurosurgical or spinal surgical / clinical oncology
consultation obtained (Grade A1)
• Local radiotherapy is the treatment of choice for non-bony lesions and should be commenced
as soon as is possible, preferably within 24 h of diagnosis. A dose of 30 Gy in 10 fractions is
recommended (Grade B1)
• Surgery is recommended for emergency decompression in the setting of bony compression

and/or to stabilize the spine (Grade A1)
• If cord compression is a presenting symptom, it is important to concurrently pursue a rapid

diagnosis and to institute systemic therapy as soon as possible (Grade A1)
4.4 Early Infection
Myeloma is associated with an increased incidence of early infection. This is related to deficits in
both humoral and cellular immunity, reduced mobility and performance status, which are all
associated with both the disease and its treatment. It has been reported that up to 10% of patients
die of infective causes within 60 days of diagnosis (Augustson et al, 2005). Neutropenia is not usually
a factor in early infection (Augustson et al, 2005)
There is increasing evidence showing that high dose steroids in the elderly or in patients with poor
performance may be detrimental, with increased toxicity and a higher mortality rate in the short-
term, and consideration should be given to the use of lower doses in this group (Ludwig et al, 2009a;
Morgan et al, 2009; Rajkumar et al, 2010). Patient education as well as access to 24-h specialist
advice and treatment is crucial in preventing and managing infection in myeloma. Prevention and
management of infection in myeloma patients is discussed in more detail in the supportive care
guideline (Snowden et al 2011).
Recommendations

• There must be 24-h access to specialist advice for the patient and/or primary care team
(Grade A1)
• Any febrile myeloma patient should be treated promptly with broad-spectrum antibiotics.
Intravenous antibiotics are required for severe systemic infection or neutropenic sepsis (Grade A1)
• Aminoglycosides should be avoided, if possible (Grade B2)
• There is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of prophylactic antibiotics (Grade
C2)
5 Myeloma bone disease
5.1 Clinical features of bone disease

Bone disease occurs in 80-90% of myeloma patients. The development of bone disease, either focal
or diffuse, can result in pain, pathological fractures/spinal cord compression and hypercalcaemia
(Coleman 1997; Croucher and Apperley 1998; Terpos and Dimopoulos 2005) Skeletal events
compromise mobility and day-to-day independence, decrease quality of life (Cocks et al, 2007;
Terpos and Rahemtulla 2004; Vogel et al, 2004) and increase overall treatment costs.
5.2 Bone fractures
Long bone fractures require stabilization and subsequent radiotherapy. Radiotherapy is useful to
improve pain control and may also promote healing of the fracture site. Where large lytic lesions
may cause skeletal instability an orthopaedic opinion should be sought and pre-emptive surgery
considered in selected patients. Specialized clinical interventions for pain associated with spinal
fractures including vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty are discussed in the supportive care guideline
(Snowden et al 2011).
Recommendations
• Local radiotherapy is helpful for pain control; a dose of 8 Gy single fraction is recommended
(Grade B1)
• Long bone fractures require stabilization and subsequent radiotherapy; a dose of
8 Gy single fraction is recommended (Grade B1)
5.3 Bisphosphonates
A Cochrane Review of the use of bisphosphonates in myeloma (Djulbegovic et al, 2002) included
data from 10 placebo-controlled trials of clodronate, pamidronate, or etidronate and from a
preliminary report of a trial of ibandronate. Based on a meta-analysis of trial data at that time, the
conclusion was that adding bisphosphonates to the treatment of myeloma reduces vertebral
fractures and pain but does not improve survival. The evidence also suggested a benefit in both

patients with and without bone disease at presentation. Randomized trials with etidronate,
clodronate, pamidronate, zoledronic acid and ibandronate in myeloma patients have now been
published (reviewed in (Terpos et al, 2009)). Oral etidronate has been shown to be ineffective in
myeloma and may cause demineralization (Belch et al, 1991). There are as yet no published
randomized studies of risedronate or alendronate, while ibandronate failed to show any effect on
fracture rates or survival (Menssen et al, 2002).
The trials of sodium clodronate (Lahtinen et al, 1992; McCloskey et al, 2001; McCloskey et al, 1998)
demonstrated benefit for up to four years in patients starting chemotherapy for the first time,
including patients with no lytic lesions. Studies using the nitrogen-containing bisphosphonates have
been primarily in patients with more extensive bony disease. Both pamidronate and zoledronic acid
have demonstrated their effectiveness in the reduction of skeletal related events (SREs) in this
setting (Berenson et al, 2001; Rosen et al, 2001; Rosen et al, 2003). Zoledronic acid and pamidronate
appear equally efficacious with regards to SRE prevention although there has been no randomized
comparison and no long-term analysis of treatment benefit. Zoledronic acid is however associated
with greater improvements in skeletal morbidity and normalization of N-telopeptide of collagen
type1 (NTX) in some studies (Rosen et al, 2001). The Medical Research Council (MRC) Myeloma IX
trial has recently reported with a median follow up of 3.7 years and demonstrated significant
benefits of zoledronic acid over sodium clodronate in reduction of SREs (27% vs 35.3% P=0.0004,
and crucially in overall survival (OS) (50 vs 44.5 months, P=0.0118) and progression free survival
(PFS) (19.5 vs 17.5 months, P=0.0179) respectively (Morgan et al, 2010). There was however a
higher incidence of bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw (BONJ) in the zoledronic
acid group (3.5% vs 0.3%). There has also been a suggestion of a survival benefit in the pamidronate
trials but this was only demonstrated following subgroup analysis.
Adverse effects on renal function have been reported particularly with the nitrogen-containing
bisphosphonates (pamidronate and zoledronic acid) and are most likely if the recommended dose or
rate of infusion is exceeded (Barri et al, 2004; Berenson et al, 1998; Chang et al, 2003; Rosen et al,
2001). Specific protocols are provided by the manufacturers with regards to administration in
patients with renal impairment (see Appendix 2).
Oral calcium and vitamin D supplementation is advised with zoledronic acid. There is no
recommendation with pamidronate and it should probably be avoided with sodium clodronate as it
may impair absorption of the oral bisphosphonate. All bisphosphonates are associated with a risk of
BONJ, but particularly the nitrogen-containing intravenous preparations. This is discussed in detail in
the supportive care guidelines (Snowden et al 2011).
Treatment in asymptomatic patients

There is little published evidence to guide the optimal time point to initiate bisphosphonate
treatment. A trial of monthly intravenous pamidronate versus placebo in newly diagnosed patients
not requiring chemotherapy suggested a bone protective effect, although other manifestations of
progression were not influenced (Musto et al, 2003). Similar results have been suggested with
zoledronic acid monthly for one year although one patient did develop BONJ (Musto et al, 2008).
Recommendations for bisphosphonate therapy
• Bisphosphonate therapy is recommended for all patients with symptomatic multiple

myeloma, whether or not bone lesions are evident (Grade A1)
• Zoledronic acid and pamidronate both show efficacy with respect to SRE prevention (grade
A recommendation; level 1b evidence) but early data regarding prolongation of event-free survival
(EFS) and OS in a large randomized trial suggest that zoledronic acid should be the bisphosphonate
of choice (Grade B1)
• Sodium clodronate is less effective than zoledronic acid but has a significantly lower
incidence of BONJ (Grade B1)
• There is no consensus regarding the duration of bisphosphonate therapy. The standard of

care to date has been indefinite bisphosphonate therapy. However, given the risk of BONJ, it is
reasonable to consider stopping therapy under certain circumstances, such as in those patients who
have achieved a CR or VGPR with transplantation and/or a novel therapy combination and have no
active bone disease; this should be at the discretion of the treating haematologist. In the absence of
definitive data the duration of therapy should take into account individual factors such as remission
status, extent of skeletal disease, renal function and patient preference. In patients who do stop
bisphosphonate therapy, therapy should be reinstituted at the time of relapse (Grade C2)
• Renal function should be carefully monitored and doses reduced in line with the
manufacturers’ guidance. For guidance on the use of bisphosphonates in renal impairment, see
Appendix 2 (Grade A1)
• At present there is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for the use of

bisphosphonates in patients with asymptomatic myeloma (Grade C2)
• Dental evaluation should be carried out before starting IV bisphosphonate therapy (Grade A1)
6 Renal Impairment

6.1 Incidence and pathophysiology
Renal impairment is a common and potentially serious complication of myeloma occurring at

presentation in 20-25% of patients (Knudsen et al, 1994) and in up to 50% of patients at some time
during their disease (Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou et al, 2007; Kyle 1975). It is possible to reverse renal
insufficiency in approximately half of patients but the remainder will have some degree of persistent
renal impairment and of these, 2-12 % will require renal replacement therapy (Clark et al, 1999).
Renal failure occurs as a result of damage caused to renal tubules by free light chains (cast
nephropathy, or “myeloma kidney”). A variety of other nephrotoxic processes may also contribute
to this damage including dehydration, hypercalcaemia, nephrotoxic drugs, and infection (Clark et al,
1999; Haubitz and Peest 2006; Penfield 2006). The risk of renal damage is directly proportionate to
the level of urinary free light chain excretion and not attributable to the light chain class or the
presence or absence of whole M-proteins. Only 2% of patients without urinary free light chain
excretion have renal impairment. This percentage increases to 50% with higher levels of urinary free
light chain excretion (Drayson et al, 2006).
Patients presenting with renal failure have a high early death rate; of 367 newly diagnosed myeloma
patients with serum creatinine >199 mmol/l, 29.4% died within 60 days of diagnosis (Augustson et al,
2005). In this study 43 of 299 deaths within 60 days were attributed wholly to renal failure. It is
therefore critically important to prevent renal failure, or if established, to reverse it as this will
significantly improve survival (Knudsen et al, 2000).
6.2 Prevention of Renal Failure
Early diagnosis of both new and relapsed myeloma enables early intervention and thus prevention of
renal damage (Augustson et al, 2005; Drayson et al, 2006). A diagnosis of light chain only myeloma
and of light chain escape may be missed if urine is not sent to the laboratory and SFLC levels are not
measured (Pratt 2008). Relapse with rising levels of free light chain and no change in whole
paraprotein (light chain escape) occurs in 5% of IgG and 15% of IgA myeloma patients (Mead and
Drayson 2009). Renal function is optimized by maintenance of a high fluid intake, at least 3 litres/day
(MRC Working Party on Leukaemia in Adults, 1984) and all patients should be instructed as to the
importance of this throughout the course of the disease. Potentially nephrotoxic drugs, including
aminoglycosides and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) should be avoided.
6.3 Early Management of Renal Failure
The goal of initial treatment is to remove precipitating causes and to rapidly reduce the light chain
load delivered to the kidney tubule. Hypercalcaemia must be corrected with bisphosphonates, used
with modified doses because the kidney is their only route of excretion (see Appendix 2). Infection
must be treated vigorously, nephrotoxic drugs stopped and patients rehydrated. Dehydration from
any cause will increase the concentration of light chains delivered to the renal tubule. Renal
recovery can be achieved with intravenous fluid to achieve a urine flow of over 3 litres/ day (MRC
Working Party on Leukaemia in Adults,1984). Volume replacement should be guided by monitoring
of central venous pressure when renal output is reduced. There is little evidence to support urinary
alkalinization (Iggo et al, 1997).The advice of a nephrologist should be sought if renal function does
not improve within 48 h of initial interventions and there must be clear communication between
haematologists and the specialist renal team to optimize outcome. Renal biopsy is desirable to help
guide management but is not essential.
Physical removal of light chains by plasma exchange (PE) is theoretically beneficial in cast
nephropathy. Data from two early small randomized trials was conflicting (Johnson et al, 1990;
Zucchelli et al, 1988) and the results of a further randomized, controlled trial (Clark et al, 2005)
were inconclusive. Results of further UK studies of PE and of large pore haemodialysis are awaited.
Reducing light chain production from the plasma cell clone is the most effective mechanism of
reducing the light chain load to the kidney. High dose dexamethasone alone is effective as a single
agent in this setting (Alexanian et al, 1992) and can lead to 100-fold falls in SFLC within 2 weeks in
sensitive disease. Lower levels are associated with renal recovery (Drayson et al, 2009; Hutchison et
al, 2008).
Oral high dose dexamethasone should be started without delay whilst decisions about definitive
chemotherapy are being made. SFLC measurements in the first 2 weeks may identify patients who
are not responding to their anti-myeloma therapy. Further work is needed to evaluate how this
finding may influence treatment decisions in the future. The high early death rate in patients with
myeloma and renal failure is mainly due to infection, which is a major preventable cause of death in
these patients. Close observation and early and intensive treatment of infective episodes is essential
if this early loss is to be improved.
Recommendations for initial management of renal failure
• Vigorously rehydrate with at least 3 litres of normal saline daily (Grade A1)
• Treat precipitating events eg hypercalcaemia, sepsis and hyperuricaemia and discontinue
nephrotoxic drugs, particularly NSAIDs (Grade A1)
• Consider physical methods of removing free light chains from the blood (plasma exchange, large
pore haemofiltration) within the context of a clinical trial(Grade C2)
• Administer high dose dexamethasone unless otherwise contraindicated pending initiation of
definitive treatment which should be started without delay
• Monitor SFLC levels (Grade B1)
• Identify and treat infection vigorously (Grade A1)

• Patients with renal failure require dose modification of bisphosphonates and the risk of renal
adverse events may be greater in patients with impaired renal function. For guidance on use of
bisphosphonates in patients with renal impairment, see Appendix 2 (Grade A1)
7 Induction therapy including management of major toxicities and stem cell harvesting
The broad aims of treatment in myeloma are to control disease, maximize quality of life and prolong
survival and can be achieved by a combination of specific disease-directed therapy and supportive
care. Although high-dose therapy is recommended where possible, many patients will not be able to
receive such therapy because of advanced age, co-morbidities or poor performance status.
Treatment decisions should be reviewed in an MDT and should take into account individual patient
factors and patient choice.
The introduction of novel agents, such as thalidomide, lenalidomide and bortezomib (usually in
combination with dexamethasone) has led to a clear improvement in survival of patients with
myeloma (Kumar et al, 2008a). However, much work is needed to determine the best sequence and
combinations of therapies. It is therefore essential that, wherever possible, patients are entered into
clinical trials. As many patients are living longer with myeloma, the impact of therapy on quality of
life is particularly important.
Many studies both in the transplant and non-transplant settings have suggested a link between the
maximal response attained and long-term outcome after initial therapy and that increasing the
complete remission rate after transplant results in prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and OS
(Lahuerta et al, 2008; van de Velde et al, 2007). Improving depth of response is therefore becoming
an increasingly important goal.
7.1 Induction therapy prior to high dose therapy (HDT), including management of
common side-effects
For patients where HDT is planned, or is a possible future option, the aim of induction treatment is
to induce high remission rates rapidly and with minimal toxicity and to preserve haemopoietic stem
cell function to ensure successful mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC).
Prior to the introduction of novel therapies, the standard of care for patients in whom HDT and
autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was planned was the use of induction therapy based on
high dose dexamethasone, such as VAD (vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone), or related
infusional regimens. These combinations were associated with response rates of 55-84% and CR
rates of 8-28% (Alexanian et al, 1990; Gore et al, 1989; Samson et al, 1989) although it should be
noted that the current definition of CR is more rigorous. However, there was significant

haematological toxicity and the need for central venous access led to an appreciable incidence of
line-related infections and thrombosis.
Table 7 shows a summary of evidence and toxicity profiles for the novel agents. Strategies for
preventing and managing known side effects are included in the relevant sections and in Section 7.3.
General prescribing points

• Guidance regarding dose-reduction of cytotoxic agents, such as melphalan and
cyclophosphamide, in the setting of low blood counts is well established in local clinical
practice guidelines and Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) documents. As a guide, the
neutrophil count is recommended to be >1.0 x 109/l and the platelet count >50 to 75 x 109/l
before commencing treatment. Treatment should be delayed until these levels are achieved,
unless cytopenias are considered to be due to marrow infiltration
• Myeloma frequently causes anaemia at diagnosis whereas thrombocytopenia is more common
in end-stage disease. The BM reserve generally improves with effective myeloma therapy
• Renal or hepatic impairment may compound drug-induced myelosuppression
• Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) can reduce/ prevent severe neutropenia and
should be considered according to local policies
• Attention should be paid to the SPC
• Prescribing should occur in close consultation with specialist pharmacists
7.1.1 Thalidomide-containing regimens
Thalidomide has a number of mechanisms of action in myeloma including anti-angiogenic activity,

inhibition of tumour necrosis factor-α, stimulation of the secretion of α-interferon (IFN-α) and
interleukin-2, induction of apoptosis and regulation of adhesion molecule expression (Hideshima et
al, 2000). It was the first of a number of novel agents responsible for improvements in survival in
myeloma and has become widely used as part of induction therapy.
Evidence for use of thalidomide-containing regimens as induction prior to SCT

A retrospective matched case control analysis compared patients treated with VAD as induction
therapy with patients treated with thalidomide/dexamethasone. This showed a significantly higher
response rate in the thalidomide arm versus the VAD arm (p<0.001) (Cavo et al, 2005). Since then,
several randomized phase III trials have evaluated thalidomide-containing combinations as induction
therapy although not all of these trials used these induction regimens specifically as induction prior
to high dose therapy. Results of trials comparing thalidomide with conventional induction therapy
are summarized in Table 1 of Appendix 3.

In general, the use of thalidomide and dexamethasone as induction does not produce superior
response rates post-ASCT. The phase III HOVON (Stichting Hemato-Oncologie voor Volwassenen
Nederland) study comparing TAD (thalidomide, doxorubicin and dexamethasone) to VAD showed
improved overall response rate, including major response, and improved PFS following ASCT
(Lokhorst et al, 2010). There was no survival benefit for the thalidomide arm, however, because
these patients had a shorter post-relapse survival. The MRC Myeloma IX trial compared CVAD
(cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone) with CTD (cyclophosphamide,
thalidomide and dexamethasone). Preliminary results have shown higher response rates in the CTD
arm but information on the benefit for PFS and OS is awaited. This is the now the most widely used
combination in the UK following the demonstration that it can be safely and effectively delivered in a
large, multi-centre clinical trial setting. Stem cell mobilization and harvesting are not adversely
affected by the use of thalidomide-containing regimens.
Toxicity of thalidomide
The principal non-haematological toxicities of thalidomide and their management are described in
Table 8.
7.1.2 Bortezomib-based regimens
Evidence for use of bortezomib-containing regimens as induction prior to SCT

The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib (Velcade, previously PS-341) is active as a single agent in
patients with untreated myeloma (Anderson 2006). A phase II study in 60 patients showed a
response rate (RR) of 28% with 10% CR but several phase II trials have confirmed higher response
rates when bortezomib is combined with dexamethasone and/or chemotherapy in previously
untreated patients who are considered eligible for ASCT. These have shown response rates ranging
from 66 to 95% with CR rates (where reported) of 6-24% and details of these studies are shown in
Table 2 of Appendix 3 .
Two large phase III trials have been reported and provide substantial evidence that bortezomib-
based therapy is a successful pre-ASCT induction regimen. The IFM (Intergroupe Francophone du
Myélome) group has completed a randomized phase III trial comparing 4 courses of VAD with
bortezomib/dexamethasone in 482 patients up to the age of 65 years (Harousseau et al, in press). In
this and the HOVON trial, which compared PAD (bortezomib, doxorubicin and dexamethasone)
and VAD (Sonneveld et al, 2008), the CR or CR/ near CR (nCR) rate increased significantly post-
ASCT in the bortezomib-containing arm. In the IFM trial, significant prolongation of PFS was seen
but this did not result in longer OS.

Toxicity of bortezomib
Bortezomib requires intravenous administration. The most frequently reported toxicities are shown
in Table 9. All are predictable but require active management and specific guidelines have been
developed for their prevention and treatment. A proforma for the early detection of side-effects for
use in patients on bortezomib therapy has been developed and is shown in Appendix 4. The key to
effective use of bortezomib is the optimal management of treatment emergent toxicities allowing
the maximum duration of therapy. Recent data from front line protocols incorporating bortezomib
suggest that a weekly regimen is as effective and associated with less neuropathy than twice weekly
regimens (Gay et al, 2009; Mateos et al, 2010). In all the trials described above, stem cell mobilization
was unaffected by bortezomib therapy and haematological recovery was adequate following stem
cell reinfusion after high dose therapy.
Neutropenia secondary to bortezomib is unusual, but thrombocytopenia is a frequent cyclical effect

with nadirs around day 11, which usually recover towards baseline by the start of the next cycle. The
platelet count should be >30 x 109/l to treat and patients may receive platelet transfusions to allow
this. If the platelet count is <30 x 109/l on day 1, dose reduction should be considered e.g. to 1mg/m2.
Thrombocytopenia tends to become less severe with time on treatment. There are no recommended
dose reductions for patients with renal or hepatic impairment. Aciclovir prophylaxis is recommended
due to increased incidence of varicella zoster infection. Venous thromboembolic events are not a
feature with bortezomib either alone or in combination and hence prophylaxis is not required
7.1.3 Lenalidomide-based regimens
Lenalidomide (Revlimid) is an orally administered thalidomide analogue with a different side-effect

profile. It has more potent in-vitro activity, including the inhibition of angiogenesis, cytokine
modulation and T-cell co-stimulation than thalidomide (Corral and Kaplan 1999; Haslett et al, 2003;
Hideshima et al, 2000).
Evidence for use of lenalidomide-containing regimens as induction prior to SCT

Several phase II studies of lenalidomide with dexamethasone +/- chemotherapy have demonstrated
high response rates of between 76 and 91% and are summarized in Appendix 3 (Table 3). In a study
of 34 patients treated with a combination of lenalidomide 25 mg daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle
and high dose dexamethasone, all patients who underwent stem cell mobilization collected sufficient
stem cells. (Rajkumar et al, 2005). Despite this, concerns have been raised about failure to harvest
adequate stem cells after prolonged lenalidomide treatment and, as a result, it is now recommended
that stem cells should be collected within 6 months of initiation of lenalidomide therapy (Kumar et
al, 2007).

Toxicity of lenalidomide
Lenalidomide is considered to be better tolerated than thalidomide. In particular, it does not cause
significant somnolence, neuropathy or constipation. Key lenalidomide toxicities are shown in Table
10. The most frequently seen toxicities occurring grade > 3 are myelosuppression (which can usually
be managed with dose reduction and growth factor support if necessary) and thrombosis.
Recommendations regarding thromboprophylaxis are described in Section 7.3.2. A full blood count
should be performed at baseline, weekly for the first 2 months of treatment and at least monthly
thereafter. Dose adjustments are recommended to manage grade 3 or 4 neutropenia or
thrombocytopenia. The incidence is higher in patients with impaired renal function (Weber et al,
2006). Dose adjustments (Table A of Appendix 2) are recommended within the SPC to manage
grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia (Table B of Appendix 2) and neutropenia (Table C of Appendix 2)
and renal impairment (Table D of Appendix 2).
Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia are the commonest Grade 3/4 toxicities. In relapsed patients
the reported incidence was 35.4% and 13%, respectively, in 2 large randomized trials (MM-009 and
MM-010) (Dimopoulos et al, 2009a). The risk of myelosuppression may be higher in patients who
have recently (≤1 year) had high dose therapy and ASCT. Importantly, the incidence of neuropathy
is low, grade 3+ neuropathy occurring in less than 5% of patients with relapsed myeloma
(Richardson et al, 2006).
7.1.4 Combinations involving 2 or more novel agents as induction therapy prior to SCT
There is evidence for high response rates and high CR rates with combinations involving more than
one novel agent reviewed in (Lonial and Cavenagh, 2009) but further data are required regarding the
toxicity profiles of these combinations and whether these higher response rates translate into
longer PFS and OS after ASCT.
Combinations, such as bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone (VTD), have given response rates
of 82 to 92% with CR rates of 18-29% (Cavo et al, 2009; Rosiñol et al, 2009) without an increase in
serious adverse events in 3-drug combinations (Cavo et al, 2009). Several other combinations have
been explored in phase II trials (see Table 4 of Appendix 3).
7.2 Initial treatment when HDT is not planned
The aim of therapy in these usually older and less fit patients is to achieve the maximum durable
response with minimal treatment-related toxicity. These patients form a heterogeneous group and
have a variable tolerance of therapy. Treatment may need to be modified in patients with poor
performance status.
A large meta-analysis showed the combination of oral melphalan and prednisolone (MP) to be as
effective as combination regimens including intravenous drugs (Myeloma Triallists’ Collaborative
Group1998). Melphalan and cyclophosphamide were shown in early randomized studies to be
equally effective (MRC Working Party for Therapeutic Trials in Leukaemia, 1971). Thus, in the past
these drugs, usually with prednisolone (P), have formed the mainstay of first line therapy in this
patient group.
Thalidomide based regimens–
Use of thalidomide has also been extensively explored in this setting. A phase III study comparing
thalidomide and dexamethasone (TD) with dexamethasone in patients with a median age of 65 years
showed a significant benefit with regard to response and time to progression (TTP) in the TD group
after 4 cycles, albeit with grade 3 or higher non-haematological toxicity being seen in 67% of patients
who received TD (Rajkumar et al, 2006). Only one study has directly compared TD with MP
(Ludwig et al, 2009a). This phase III study in 298 elderly patients showed superior responses in the
TD arm but similar PFS and TTP in both groups. However, OS was significantly lower in the TD
group, and it was thought that this very elderly population (60% of patients between 70 and 79
years) were unable to tolerate the high doses of thalidomide and dexamethasone used.
Five randomized trials have compared oral MP with MPT (melphalan, prednisolone and thalidomide)
as first line treatment in elderly patients and the results of these studies are summarized in Table 5
of Appendix 3. Despite variation in the doses of all 3 agents between the 5 studies, all have shown
superior response rates and PFS in the MPT arms and two have shown significant prolongation of
OS (Facon et al, 2007; Hulin 2009). The failure of other studies to produce this benefit was probably
due to effective salvage therapy incorporating novel agents at relapse (Gulbrandsen et al, 2008;
Palumbo et al, 2008a; Wijermans et al, 2008).
Most randomized studies have shown that thalidomide doses above 200mg/day are poorly tolerated
by elderly patients. In general patients receiving MPT in the above trials did experience an increased
incidence of side effects, notably cytopenias, thrombosis, fatigue and peripheral neuropathy.
Given the historical equivalence of cyclophosphamide to melphalan, UK investigators have
developed an alternative regimen to MPT comprising cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and
dexamethasone (CTD). In older less fit patients attenuated doses (CTDa) are given. CTDa was used
in the non-intensive arm of the Myeloma IX trial. Early results from this study demonstrate superior
response rates for CTDa over MP and suggest similar efficacy to MPT although PFS and OS data are
not yet available (Morgan et al, 2009).
Bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based regimens

The newer agents, bortezomib (Velcade, V) and lenalidomide (Revlimid, R) are also effective when
used in combination with steroid +/- alkylator. A phase III study comparing M, P and bortezomib
(VMP) with MP showed superior response rates , PFS and OS in the VMP group (San Miguel et al,
2008b). This included a 30% CR rate vs 4% with MP, p<0.001) and median PFS 24 month vs 16.6
months with MP. The VMP regimen was generally well tolerated, although peripheral neuropathy
(grade 3 or above) affected 13% of patients. This resolved or improved in 75% of cases in a median
of approximately 60 days. Patients receiving VMP also had a higher incidence of gastro-intestinal
complications and fatigue. More recent trials have investigated once weekly bortezomib in a
modified VMP which results in similar response rates but reduced toxicity, especially neurotoxicity
(Mateos et al, 2010). A combination of M, P and lenalidomide (MPR) is also being explored. A phase
I/II study produced comparable response rates to MPT with a low incidence of non-haematological
adverse events (Palumbo et al, 2007). The relative efficacy of lenalidomide with low dose
dexamethasone (Rd) when compared with melphalan-based regimens is now being tested in a phase
III trial (Palumbo et al, 2009).
A randomized trial of 445 patients comparing lenalidomide with either high dose or low dose
dexamethasone in newly diagnosed myeloma showed significant benefits for low dose
dexamethasone in terms of OS at 1 year (96% vs 86% p=0.0002) (Rajkumar et al, 2010). For this
reason, the trial was stopped early and patients on high-dose dexamethasone therapy were crossed
over to low-dose therapy. The decision regarding dexamethasone dose should be made on an
individual patient basis based upon assessment of co-morbidities, tolerance and performance status.
Plasma cell leukaemia

The outcome with conventional chemotherapy is poor, as the reported median survival is 8-12
months (Dimopoulos et al, 1994; Garcia-Sanz et al, 1999) although an improvement in outcome has
been reported with autologous transplantation (Drake et al, 2010) and bortezomib treatment
(Finnegan et al, 2006).
Summary of treatment recommendations
General
• Chemotherapy prescription should be undertaken by an experienced clinician with input from
a specialist chemotherapy-trained pharmacist (Grade A1)
• SPC recommendations for dose adjustments of chemotherapy drugs and use of G-CSF
support should be followed wherever possible (Grade A1)
• Patients should be appropriately dosed, to allow for renal and liver function (Grade A1)
• Patients with cytopenias at baseline due to limited marrow reserve require more frequent
monitoring and dose adjustment (Grade A1)
• All patients should be considered for entry into a clinical trial (Grade A1)
• The choice of therapy should take into account patient preference, co-morbidities and
toxicity profile (Grade A1)
Specific treatment recommendations for Induction therapy prior to high dose therapy (HDT)

• VAD or single agent dexamethasone should no longer be routinely used as induction therapy
(Grade A1)
• Induction regimens should contain at least one novel agent (Grade A1)
• Examples of induction regimens that are superior to VAD in terms of response rates include
CTD, TAD, bortezomib/dexamethasone and PAD. (Grade A1)
• Decisions regarding the most appropriate induction for individual patients will require the
assessment of a number of factors, such as renal function, thrombotic risk and pre-existing
neuropathy although it is appreciated that some agents are not routinely funded as initial
therapy in the UK. CTD is the combination of which there is the most clinical experience in
the UK (Grade C2)
Specific treatment recommendations for older and/or less fit patients in whom HDT is not
planned initial therapy
• Induction therapy should consist of either
o a thalidomide-containing regimen in combination with an alkylating agent and steroid
such as MPT or CTDa (Grade C2) or
o bortezomib in combination with melphalan and prednisolone (Grade C1).
Specific treatment recommendations for patients with plasma cell leukaemia and rarer
myeloma subtypes
Recommendations (all are Grade C based on level IV evidence)
• The use of initial treatment with bortezomib and autologous stem cell transplantation should
be considered in responding patients with plasma cell leukaemia (Grade C1)
• IgD, IgE and IgM myeloma are associated with a poor outcome but there is insufficient data to
support specific alternative treatment strategies at this time. (Grade C1)
7.3 Prevention and management of treatment related complications of therapy
7.3.1 Peripheral neuropathy
The investigation and management of peripheral neuropathy is described in detail in the supportive
care guideline (Snowden et al 2011). Some of the key recommendations are listed below:
• Peripheral neuropathy is common at diagnosis and as a result of many myeloma therapies
• Peripheral neuropathy and autonomic neuropathy symptoms and signs should be actively
sought and sequentially graded during the course of therapy using a scale, such as the National
Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria
(http://ctep.cancer.gov/protocoldevelopment/electronic_applications/docs/ctcv20_4-30-
992.pdf) to provide an objective assessment and allow identification of trends (Grade A1)
• Any patient who develops a significant (eg. >NCI grade 2) or progressive peripheral or
autonomic neuropathy following treatment should be managed with graded dose reduction or
drug withdrawal. Guidelines for dose reductions of thalidomide and bortezomib are shown in
Table 11. Continuation of dose intense treatment in the face of neuropathy may cause
permanent neurological damage. (Grade A1)
• The management of peripheral neuropathy should include symptom control along with
treatment of any potentially reversible causes. Optimal management of co-morbid causes such
as diabetes mellitus may also improve tolerance of neurotoxic drugs (Grade A1)
• Neuropathic pain is poorly responsive to simple analgesics, NSAIDs and opioid drugs.
Neuromodulatory agents are being increasingly recommended to treat neuropathic pain.
Patients with progressive neuropathic pain despite appropriate analgesia should be referred
promptly for specialist advice regarding pain management (Grade A1)
7.3.2 Thromboprophylaxis
Myeloma and other plasma cell disorders have a well-established association with venous
thromboembolism (VTE) (Srkalovic et al, 2004). Active disease, cancer therapies, infection, previous
VTE, immobility and paraplegia are all well-recognized additional risk factors for VTE in hospitalized
patients. Thalidomide and lenalidomide have been demonstrated to further increase this risk. Use of
thromboprophylaxis and treatment of both thrombosis and bleeding problems in myeloma patients
are discussed in detail in the Guidelines for Supportive Care in multiple myeloma (Snowden et al
2011)(. Key recommendations from that document are listed below.
Recommendations
• Cancer, cancer therapies, infection, previous VTE, immobility, obesity, paraplegia, erythropoietin
treatment, dehydration and renal failure are all well-recognized risk factors VTE, particularly in
hospitalized patients. As with other areas of thromboprophylaxis, a risk stratified approach is
appropriate in patients with myeloma. (Grade A1)
• A risk assessment model for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in multiple myeloma
patients treated with thalidomide or lenalidomide is contained within the Guidelines for Supportive
Care in multiple myeloma (Snowden et al 2011)(adapted from (Palumbo et al, 2008b)
• All patients who are due to start thalidomide or lenalidomide-containing therapy should undergo a
risk assessment for VTE and prospectively receive appropriate thromboprophylactic measures.
(Grade A1)
• In patients receiving thalidomide or lenalidomide, aspirin 75325 mg may be considered as VTE
prophylaxis in low risk patients only (i.e. without risk factor present), unless contraindicated (Grade
B2)

• Patients receiving thalidomide or lenalidomide in addition to combination chemotherapy/anthracy-
clines/high dose steroids, or those with two or more myeloma/individual risk factors should be
offered prophylaxis with LMWH (high risk prophylactic dose) or dose-adjusted therapeutic warfarin,
unless contraindicated. There is no role for fixed, low dose warfarin (Grade B1)
• The duration of thromboprophylaxis remains unclear but should be guided by risk factors such
as active disease (e.g. for the first 4–6 months of treatment until disease control achieved) and de-
escalated or discontinued unless there are ongoing significant risk factors (Grade C2)
• Treatment of confirmed VTE should follow current practice guidelines using adjusted dose warfarin
or LMWH and appropriate monitoring (Grade A1)
7.4 Can novel agents overcome the poor prognosis associated with adverse cytogenetic
abnormalities?
This group comprises some 15-20% of newly diagnosed patients, and includes those with the following
cytogenetic abnormalities: t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), del(17q) or non-hyperdiploid disease (Stewart et
al, 2007). Although del(13q) by metaphase cytogenetic analysis is an adverse prognostic marker, these
patients invariably have a t(4;14) translocation. Gain of chromosome (1q21) has also recently been
described as conferring a poor outcome, however, this occurs in association with t(4;14) and del(13q),
and may not be an independent prognostic marker (Fonseca et al, 2006).
An important unanswered question is whether the use of novel agents may overcome cytogenetically-
defined poor prognosis disease. In the VISTA (Velcade® as Initial Standard Therapy in Multiple
Myeloma) study (Mateos et al, 2008) in the non-transplant setting, patients with high risk disease who
received bortezomib had equivalent response rates, PFS and OS to standard risk patients but the
number of patients in this group was small. In the IFM study, pre-ASCT induction with bortezomib
partially overcame the poor prognosis of t(4;14) disease (67 patients), but had no impact on 17p
disease (51 patients) (Avet-Loiseau et al, 2009). In 16 patients with high risk disease treated with
lenalidomide and dexamethasone, response rates and survival were similar to standard risk patients,
albeit with shorter duration of response (Kapoor et al, 2009). All these data are derived from
retrospective sub-analyses of trials, and prospective data on larger patient numbers with longer follow
up are needed to establish the role of novel agents in the setting of high risk disease. Available
information to date, however, suggest that bortezomib may be able to overcome the poor prognostic
impact of some genetic subtypes, such as t(4;14) disease.
Conclusions
• Novel agents have increased the overall and complete remission rates if used pre-ASCT
(Grade A1)
• Confirmation is needed that these higher response rates translate into longer PFS and OS
after ASCT (Grade C2)
• Further data regarding a number of combinations are required, particularly those containing
more than one novel agent (Grade C2)
7.5 Stem cell harvesting after induction therapy including novel agents
Duration of induction treatment prior to SCT

The majority of patients achieve maximum response to induction therapy after 4 to 6 cycles.
Response should be assessed after each cycle. Although CR prior to HDT is a good prognostic
factor, there is currently no evidence that prolongation of induction treatment to achieve a CR
improves outcome. It is currently therefore recommended to treat to at least PR, which usually
occurs within 4 to 6 cycles and to switch to an alternative regimen if there is evidence of
progressive disease after 2 cycles or less than PR after 4. The treatment of refractory disease is
discussed in more detail in Section 8. Alternatively, in responses <PR it is also reasonable to
proceed directly to HDT after completion of 4 cycles of induction therapy if stem cells can be
successfully harvested.
Stem cell mobilization

Mobilization with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF may overcome the effects of lenalidomide (Mark et
al, 2008) and is recommended if induction therapy with a lenalidomide-containing regimen has
continued for > 4 cycles.
Recommendations (all are Grade C recommendations; level IV evidence)

• Peripheral blood stem cell harvesting (PBSCH) should be carried out within 4-6
cycles for all induction regimens that incorporate a novel agent (Grade B1)
• If induction therapy with a lenalidomide-containing regimen has continued for >
4 cycles, mobilization with cyclophosphamide and G-CSF is recommended
(Grade C2)
• Ideally patients should undergo stem cell mobilization within 6 to 8 weeks of
completion of induction therapy (Grade B1)
7.6 Chemotherapy in Patients with Renal Failure
In addition to the steps described in Section 6, effective treatment of myeloma is the most successful
way of ensuring renal recovery. Regimens that can be used without dose reduction in renal
impairment and that produce the highest response rate and most rapid responses should theoretically
produce the highest rates of renal recovery. It is essential to understand how agents should be used in
the presence of renal impairment to ensure maximal safety and efficacy (see Table 12).

Melphalan
Melphalan is hydrolysed and excreted via the kidneys and there is concern that BM suppression may
develop if full doses are used in patients with renal impairment. The manufacturer recommends that
initial doses of melphalan should be reduced by 50% if the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is < 40-50
ml/min, and that it should not be used in patients in whom the GFR is below 30 ml/min. However this
is at variance with data which shows that the extent of drug accumulation is variable in each individual
and cannot be predicted from the degree of renal impairment (Osterborg et al, 1989) and also that,
even with doses of melphalan 25 mg/m2 intravenously, patients with severe renal impairment, including
dialysis dependency, did not have longer periods of leucopenia nor adverse OS (Vigneau et al, 2002).
A retrospective analysis of data from patients with renal impairment treated in clinical trials led
Carlson et al ( 2005) to propose a 25% initial dose reduction with titration according to BM toxicity
for subsequent courses.
Cyclophosphamide metabolites are excreted in the urine. Manufacturers recommend a dose

reduction of 25% if the GFR is 10-50 ml/min, and of 50% if GFR is less than 10 ml/min. Clinical
experience suggests it is safe to titrate the dose in subsequent courses according to response.
Anthracyclines and high dose dexamethasone

Doxorubicin and dexamethasone are commonly used agents, particularly in combination with novel
agents (e.g. PAD) and do not require dosage adjustment in the presence of renal impairment even if it
is severe (Aitchison et al, 1990).
Thalidomide
The pharmacokinetics of thalidomide seems to be unaltered in patients with renal dysfunction

(Eriksson et al, 2003). Less than 1% of thalidomide is excreted unchanged in the urine and it is not
hepatically or renally metabolized to any large extent, appearing to undergo non-enzymatic hydrolysis
in plasma to form multiple degradation products. Manufacturers do not recommend dosage reduction.
Although the clearance of thalidomide is increased during dialysis it appears unnecessary to give a
supplementary dose. A report of thalidomide use in 20 patients with renal impairment did not show
any increase in toxicity (Tosi et al, 2004) although there have been case reports of hyperkalaemia and
tumour lysis syndrome. Less than 3% of thalidomide is excreted unchanged in the urine, however
metabolically active hydrolytic products formed via non-enzymatic processes are also present in
plasma and urine and their major route of excretion was is the urine (>90%). The manufacturers
recommend that patients with severe renal impairment should be carefully monitored for adverse
reactions.
Bortezomib

In vitro studies indicate that bortezomib is metabolized primarily through oxidative deboronation by
the liver cytochrome P450 system and that early disposition kinetics of bortezomib are not affected by
creatinine clearance (range <30 ml/min to >80 ml/min) in patients (Bortezomib SPC). Bortezomib can
therefore be used in renal impairment without dose reduction. There have been no large prospective
randomized studies of the use of bortezomib in patients with myeloma and renal impairment.
However, a number of studies have shown that bortezomib either alone, or in combination with other
agents, produces similar response rates in these patients to those seen in patients with normal renal
function and that there is no excess toxicity. These include sub-analyses of patients with renal
impairment in a number of large studies (Dimopoulos et al, 2009b; Jagannath et al, 2005a; San Miguel et
al, 2008c). Median time to first response in the VISTA trial was 1.4 months with VMP compared to
3.5 months with MP (Dimopoulos et al, 2009b). Whilst there are a number of studies showing high
levels of renal recovery using bortezomib containing regimens (Chanan-Khan et al, 2007; Kastritis et al,
2007; Roussou et al, 2008; Ludwig et al, 2009b) there is no randomized clinical trial evidence to justify
recommendation of its routine use in this setting.
Lenalidomide
There are limited data on the clinical use of lenalidomide in renal failure but a pharmacokinetic study
in patients with varying degrees of renal impairment following a single dose of lenalidomide 25 mg
orally showed that lenalidomide is substantially excreted by the kidneys (Chen et al, 2007) with a mean
urinary recovery of unchanged lenalidomide of 84% of the dose in subjects with normal renal function.
Recovery declined to 43% in subjects with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min),
and still further in end stage renal impairment. This study also showed that a 4-h haemodialysis
removed 31% of lenalidomide. Lenalidomide should be used with caution and appropriate dose
reductions in patients with renal impairment because of the increased risk of cytopenias.
Recommended dose reductions for patients with renal impairment are shown in Table D of Appendix
2.
Recommendations
• Dexamethasone alone can be given as initial treatment pending decisions on
subsequent chemotherapy and the outcome of full supportive measures (Grade B1)
• Melphalan can be considered for patients with renal impairment in whom other
regimens may be relatively contraindicated. The dose should be reduced by 25% in the
first course if GFR < 30 ml/min and titrated against marrow toxicity in subsequent
courses (Grade C2)
• Cyclophosphamide can be used with a dose reduction of 25% if the GFR is 10-50
ml/min, and of 50% if GFR is less than 10 ml/min and titrated in subsequent courses
according to response (Grade A1)

• Thalidomide can be used without dose modification in patients with renal failure
(Grade A1)
• Bortezomib can be safely used in myeloma patients with renal failure including those
on dialysis at the standard starting dose of 1.3 mg/m2. However, because of limited
data on toxicity, patients with renal impairment (creatinine clearance ≤ 30 ml/min) and
patients on haemodialysis should be closely monitored for toxicity. Although there is
mounting evidence that bortezomib appears effective in this setting,
further studies are needed to confirm results derived from subgroup analyses
of large randomized trials and data from other non randomized studies (Grade
A1)
• Lenalidomide can be given in patients with renal impairment but dose adjustments as
recommended by the manufacturer should be implemented (Grade A1)
8. Myeloma refractory to induction therapy
Primary Refractory myeloma is defined as disease that is non-responsive in patients who have never
achieved a minimal response or better with any therapy. It includes patients who never achieve MR or
better in whom there is no significant change in M protein and no evidence of clinical progression and
also patients with progressive disease(Rajkumar et al, 2011). The principles of managing primary
refractory disease differ depending on whether the patient is still considered a candidate for high dose
therapy.
Patients for whom high dose therapy remains an option

It is important to distinguish patients who have refractory but non-progressive disease, i.e. are
clinically stable, from those who have evidence of disease progression on induction therapy. There
is evidence that the former group still stand to benefit from consolidation with high dose therapy
(Alexanian et al, 1994a; Alexanian et al, 1994b; Kumar et al, 2004). The decision of whether to
proceed straight to PBSCH and HDT may depend on co-morbidities, toxicity from previous
treatment, and, perhaps, degree of BM infiltration. Such decisions should ideally be undertaken in an
MDT meeting.
In cases where the BM is heavily infiltrated, 2 options are available
1. Use a non-cross-reactive mobilization regimen such as ESHAP (etoposide,
methylprednisolone, cytarabine, cisplatin) (D'Sa et al, 2004) in patients with normal renal
function to achieve further cytoreduction prior to HDT
2. For patients who are fit enough (sufficient BM reserve, no prohibitive toxicity), use of a
salvage regimen prior to stem cell harvesting and HDT is recommended to achieve a greater
depth of response as this correlates with improved outcome (Morris et al, 2004).

Patients with progressive disease on first-line therapy should receive salvage treatment. These
patients have a bleak outlook, and often have poor genetic markers. It is important that such
patients are identified early so that salvage therapy can be instituted before further organ damage
occurs. Careful monitoring of urinary Bence-Jones protein (BJP) is important to avoid renal damage,
and salvage regimens that include platinum agents should be avoided in patients with significant BJ
proteinuria (>1 g/24 h).
Where possible, patients should be entered into clinical trials. Outside trials, a bortezomib-
based regimen should be used, if the patient received thalidomide as part of their induction therapy.
If they did not, a thalidomide-containing regimen is an option eg. CTD or DT-PACE
(dexamethasone, thalidomide, cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide) (Lee et al,
2003a). Other alternative regimens include platinum-based regimens (see above), which can also be
used as mobilising chemotherapy together with growth factors, or lenalidomide–containing regimens
for patients with ≥grade 2 peripheral neuropathy.
Patients for whom SCT is (no longer) an option

Disease that is non-responsive to initial treatment may remain clinically stable with no evidence of
either clinical or laboratory progression for prolonged periods and therefore these patients may not
require immediate further treatment but should be closely monitored (MRC, unpublished data).
Second-line treatment for those requiring therapy should be a combination including an alternative
novel agent eg. VMP in patients who have received upfront CTDa.
Recommendations
• All patients should be considered for entry into a clinical trial (Grade A1)
• For patients intolerant of thalidomide, or refractory to first-line therapy, a bortezomib-based
salvage regimen is recommended. (Grade B2)
• Patients with ≥grade 2 peripheral neuropathy should receive a lenalidomide-based regimen
(Grade B1)
9. High dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT)
There is more than 20 years experience of HDT and ASCT in the management of myeloma since
the efficacy of high dose melphalan in the treatment of high-risk myeloma and plasma cell leukaemia
was first reported (McElwain and Powles 1983). ASCT has become the first line standard of care in
those deemed biologically fit enough for this option mainly because of the low transplant-related
mortality (TRM) and prolongation of EFS resulting in improved quality of life. Four pivotal
randomized studies have been published comparing combination chemotherapy with a high dose
approach as first-line therapy for newly diagnosed myeloma patients aged up to 65 years. In most of
these studies, maintenance IFN was given in both arms. The results of these studies are summarized
in Table 6 of Appendix 3.

Stem cells are now almost exclusively derived from peripheral blood following stimulation with
growth factors with or without chemotherapy. The optimal regimen for mobilizing PBSC is unclear
but cyclophosphamide (1.5 - 4 g/m2) with G-CSF is widely used. Purging harvested stem cells with
monoclonal antibodies and/or CD34+ stem cell selection does reduce contamination with tumour
cells but does not influence the relapse risk (De Rosa et al, 2004; Stewart et al, 2001).
9.1 Conditioning
High dose melphalan (200 mg/m2) remains the standard conditioning prior to ASCT. Recent studies
have shown that the dose of melphalan can be increased to 220 mg/m2 (Garban et al, 2006), with
improved PFS compared with historical controls, or to 240–300 mg/m2, in combination with
amifostine, (Reece et al 2006) but at the cost of increased toxicity. The addition of total body
irradiation (TBI) results in increased toxicity (Moreau et al, 2002) with no improvement in response
rate or PFS, whilst combination chemotherapy increases the toxicity (Benson et al, 2007; Capria et al,
2006; Vela-Ojeda et al, 2007). Bortezomib has shown synergistic effects with melphalan without
prolonged haematological toxicity. The recently reported IFM phase II study enrolled 54 untreated
patients to receive bortezomib (1 mg/m2 x 4) and melphalan (200 mg/m2) as conditioning regimen
(Roussel et al, 2010). The authors reported a response ≥VGPR in 70% of patients and 32% CR. No
toxic deaths were observed with minimal peripheral neuropathy. Due to limited follow-up, response
durability data are not yet available (Roussel et al, 2010).
9.2 Age
Though to date randomized controlled data (RCT) data on use of ASCT have related mostly to
patients ≤65 years, results have indicated that, in selected patients aged >65 years, outcomes are
similar to those in younger patients (Jantunen 2006; Reece et al, 2003; Siegel et al, 1999). Data from
the ABMTR (Reece et al, 2003) comparing the outcome of 110 patients aged >60 years with 382
patients aged <60 years showed no difference in TRM, EFS or OS. Over 70 years, the toxicity of
melphalan 200 mg/m2 is increased, with a TRM of 16% reported in one series (Badros et al, 2001a).
An alternative HDT is modified/intermediate dose melphalan, as reported by (Palumbo et al, 2004),
where 2 cycles of intermediate dose melphalan (100 mg/m2; IDM) with PBSC support was compared
with 6 cycles of MP in patients aged 65-70 years in a RCT, demonstrating a median OS of 58 months
with IDM compared to 37.2 months for MP. Kumar et al (2008b) compared a group of 33 patients
≥70 years at the time of HDT with a group of 60 patients <65 years. Despite the fact that more of
the elderly patients received a reduced dose of melphalan, the overall response rate and TTP was
similar between the two groups. These results indicate that ASCT can be safely performed in
patients aged >65 years if care is taken with patient selection, taking into account pre-existing co-
morbidities and performance status. Limited data exist to demonstrate that stem cell yields in
mobilized blood of patients >60 years are lower and that this can affect platelet recovery (Fietz et al,
2004; Morris et al, 2003).
9.3 Timing of ASCT

The encouraging results reported with novel agents have challenged the role of ASCT as part of
upfront therapy. Several groups have reported early results of prospective studies evaluating the use
of ASCT at the time of disease progression after initial induction and consolidation using novel agent
combinations. It is, however, likely that ASCT will further increase the rate and depth of responses
achieved with induction therapy with a consequent improvement in PFS. There is therefore
currently no evidence to support deferral of the first ASCT until the time of first relapse, though
prospective studies are underway to explore this possibility further.
9.4 Single versus tandem autologous stem cell transplant

Barlogie et al (1997) pioneered the use of tandem ASCT in the early management of myeloma in the
Total Therapy I program, producing a CR rate of 41% and median OS of 79 months. The IFM94 trial
was the first randomized study comparing single and tandem transplants, reporting improved EFS
(30 vs 25 months) and OS (58 vs 48 months) (Attal et al, 2003). However, the recently published
systematic review of 6 RCTs including more than 1800 patients failed to demonstrate an
improvement in OS or PFS with the use of tandem ASCT in previously untreated patients (Kumar et
al, 2009a). Two studies suggest that the second procedure is most beneficial in those individuals that
have not achieved at least a VGPR (>90% reduction in serum monoclonal protein) with the first
transplant (Attal et al, 2003; Cavo et al, 2007).
An alternative strategy is to collect sufficient stem cells to support two ASCT but to defer the
second ASCT until the time of relapse and this approach is increasingly employed. Individuals with
the best outcome following a ‘deferred’ second ASCT are those achieving a first progression-free
interval of at least 2 years following their first transplant (Mikhael et al, 2004). Definitive
recommendations regarding the use of a second ASCT at the time of relapse cannot be made,
especially in light of emerging new biological agents. It is recommended that the use of ASCT in the
relapse disease setting should, where possible, be performed as part of a clinical study protocol,
such as the current joint UKMF/ British Society of Bone Marrow Transplantation (BSBMT) study,
Myeloma X.
9.5 High Dose Therapy in Renal Failure

High dose therapy with ASCT has been reported by several centres as a feasible treatment modality
in patients with renal failure including those patients requiring dialysis. The use of melphalan at 200
mg/m2 is associated with a high TRM (16 to 29%) in patients on dialysis (Knudsen et al, 2005; San
Miguel et al, 2000). This compares with a TRM of only 5% in a series of 38 patients with renal failure
not on dialysis receiving melphalan 200 mg/m2 reported by Sirohi et al, (2001) and 1 out of 17
patients died who received melphalan at 100mg/m2 whilst on dialysis (Raab et al, 2006). A
retrospective BSBMT study looking at high-dose melphalan in 31 patients (27 with myeloma), of
whom 23 were on dialysis, conditioned with doses of melphalan 60 – 200 mg/m2 recorded a TRM of

19% (Bird et al, 2006). All studies describe up to 24% of patients coming off dialysis post-transplant
(Bird et al, 2006; Lee et al, 2004).
The largest series of reported patients is from the Little Rock team. In an initial report (Badros et al,
2001b), severe toxicities, were observed in 60 patients receiving melphalan 200 mg/m2, leading them
to reduce the dose in subsequent patients to 140 mg/m2. The threshold for melphalan dose
reduction was a creatinine of over 179 mmol/l, equivalent to a GFR of <30 ml/min.These data were
extended in a subsequent report, showing a TRM of 19% in 59 patients on dialysis at the time of
transplant, 27 of whom had received melphalan 200 mg/m2 (Lee et al, 2004). Even at reduced doses
of melphalan, toxicity can be significant with prolonged mucositis and hospitalization (Raab et al,
2006). The response rates in patients are similar to matched controls.
Recommendations
• HDT with ASCT should be part of primary treatment in newly diagnosed patients up to the
age of 65 years with adequate performance status and organ function (Grade C1)
• HDT with ASCT should be considered in patients aged >65 years with good performance
status (Grade C1)
• Conditioning with melphalan alone, without TBI, is recommended (Grade B1). The usual
dose is 200 mg/m2 but this should be reduced in older patients (over 65-70 years) and those
with renal failure (see below)
• Planned double (“tandem”) ASCT cannot be recommended on the current evidence.
However, it is recommended that enough stem cells are collected to support two high dose
procedures in patients with good performance status (Grade B1)
• Purging is not of clinical benefit and is not therefore recommended (Grade C1)
• HDT and ASCT may be considered for patients with severe renal impairment (creatinine
clearance/GFR <30 ml/min) but the dose of melphalan should be reduced to a maximum of
140 mg/m2 (Grade B2) and the procedure should only be carried out in a centre with special
expertise and specialist nephrology support (Grade C1)
10. Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation (AlloSCT)
10.1 Myeloablative (full intensity, FI) allogeneic matched family donor (MFD) stem cell
transplantation
AlloSCT can result in long-term disease-free survival but its role in the management of patients with
myeloma has been controversial because of the high TRM and morbidity, primarily related to co-
morbidities and advanced age (Gahrton et al, 1991). However, outcomes have improved significantly
over time. In cohorts transplanted from 1983-1993 and 1994-1998, TRM decreased from 46% to
30% (Gahrton et al, 2001). Three key studies in the area of FI AlloSCT have reported results: the US
intergroup (Barlogie et al 2006a), the Hovon group (Lokhorst et al, 2003) and BSBMT (Hunter et al,
2005). These results are summarized in Table 8. The reported TRM of 34-54% demonstrated the
limitations of this type of conditioning despite the long-term EFS of 22-36% and OS 28-44% with

follow-up between 5-7 years. Although these studies examined variations in the conditioning used,
including T-cell depletion, no significant impact on TRM was noted with the exception of the
superiority of melphalan over cyclophosphamide (Hunter et al, 2005).
Patient selection through careful pre-transplant assessment is important. Co-morbidity scores may
be of value, and may be of greater significance than biological age. Outcome after FI AlloSCT is
inferior in patients transplanted beyond first remission or in patients with refractory disease
(Crawley et al, 2005; Maloney et al, 2003). The remission status post-transplant is also important,
with the achievement of a molecular CR being associated with a very low risk of relapse (Corradini
et al, 2003). Prior ASCT is associated with poorer outcomes with myeloablative conditioning
(Crawley et al, 2007; Hunter et al, 2005). A negative impact on outcome is also seen with a
prolonged time to transplant and with donor/recipient sex-mismatching.
The purest ‘proof of principle’ of the activity of a graft-versus-myeloma (GvM) effect is the efficacy
of donor lymphocyte infusions (DLI) at the time of relapse of disease. The largest series reported
(Lokhorst et al, 2004), demonstrated that there is clearly a DLI-mediated GvM. Importantly, tumour
response was strongly associated with the presence of graft-versus-host disease (GvHD). These data
indicate that GvM and GvHD are closely related and largely overlapping phenomena. There are
emerging data that concurrent treatment with DLI and novel therapies can increase response rates
(Kröger et al, 2004). DLI should be considered for patients with relapsed/persistent disease.
10.2 Reduced intensity conditioned (RIC) AlloSCT
To reduce TRM and to permit the application of AlloSCT to older, less fit patients, reduced
intensity conditioned AlloSCT (RIC AlloSCT) has been explored. Several studies have shown that
this approach is feasible with a significant reduction in TRM. As the conditioning is less
cytoreductive, RIC transplants are dependent to a large extent on GvM. One strategy is to perform
sequential ASCT/RIC AlloSCT such that minimal disease burden is present at the time of AlloSCT,
allowing time for the GvM to be effective. The results of a number of these studies are summarized
in Table 8 of Appendix 3. The Seattle group has studied this approach using sequential ASCT
followed by a T-replete, low-dose TBI-based RIC AlloSCT (Maloney et al, 2003). A day 100 TRM of
0% and 48 month OS and PFS values of 69% and 45% respectively have been reported, with a low
incidence of acute but a high incidence of chronic GvHD.
A number of Phase II studies have reported similar findings (Le Blanc et al, 2001; Gerull et al, 2005;
Mohty et al, 2004; Perez-Simon et al, 2003; Rotta et al, 2009). In these studies, the presence of
chronic GvHD was associated with the achievement of CR and OS/PFS. In a retrospective EBMT
study, Crawley et al (2005) showed that the best outcomes were associated with the development
of limited chronic GvHD, with T cell depletion being associated with significantly higher relapse
rates. Taken together, these data suggest that clinically effective GvM is intimately associated with
GvHD and that, by implication, strategies designed to abrogate GvHD could have deleterious effects

on disease control. Severe GvHD is tolerated poorly by older patients and impacts significantly on
quality of life and is an important cause of late mortality after AlloSCT.
Several “biological” (donor versus no donor) studies have been reported (Garban et al, 2006; Bruno
et al, 2007; Rosinol et al, 2008), summarized in Table 7 of Appendix 3. TRM rates of <20% are
reported with 29 - 80% EFS and 41 - 80% OS resulting from short and variable reported follow-up. In
these studies, differences in patient selection/ characteristics (eg. del l3q, high Β2-microglobulin
patients versus unselected) conditioning and GvHD incidence are likely to have resulted in the
observed differences in outcomes. In at least one of the studies, there were no event-free survivors at
5 years (Garban et al, 2006). Recently, longer term results (median follow up 6.3 years) of 102 patients
from the Italian group have been published (Rotta et al, 2009). Forty-two percent of patients
developed grade 2 - 4 acute GvHD and 74% extensive chronic GvHD. Five-year OS and PFS were 64%
and 36%, respectively but the median time to relapse was 5 years. Theses data indicate a continuing
problem with relapse, including late events and extramedullary relapse and the high rate of chronic
GvHD is likely to result in further TRM. No prospective trials have compared ablative with RIC
AlloSCT in this setting. However, an EBMT analysis (Crawley et al, 2007) has shown similar OS with
both approaches. RIC AlloSCT patients had a lower TRM but a higher relapse rate and lower PFS.
10.3 Matched unrelated donor (MUD) AlloSCT
In many diseases, outcomes with MUD AlloSCT have improved with time and, in many settings, have
become equivalent to matched sibling transplantation. However, retrospective studies in myeloma
have shown a significantly higher TRM than with sibling AlloSCT (Shaw et al, 2003) and as a result,
myeloablative MUD AlloSCT is not currently recommended and should only be carried out in the
context of prospective clinical trials.
The role of RIC MUD AlloSCT remains to be defined although encouraging results have been
reported, with short-term TRM of approximately 20% (Kröger et al, 2002; Shaw et al, 2003). Further
prospective trials are warranted in order to better define the role of RIC MUD AlloSCT for patients
with myeloma.
Recommendations
• Treatment decisions that involve AlloSCT are some of the most difficult for patients.
Patients need to be fully informed and involved in the decision making process. Young
patients with matched sibling donors who are interested in pursuing curative therapy should
be referred to a haematologist with an interest in allografting myeloma patients so that they
gain an understanding of the risks and benefits of this procedure (Grade C2)
• Allogeneic SCT should be carried out in EBMT accredited centres where data are collected
prospectively as part of international transplant registries and, where possible, should be
carried out in the context of a clinical trial (Grade A1)
• Allogeneic transplant procedures for patients with myeloma in first response should only be
considered for selected groups because of the risk of significant transplant-related morbidity
and mortality (Grade C2).
• A myeloablative MFD AlloSCT should only be considered in selected patients up to the age
of 40 years who have achieved at least a partial response to initial therapy (Grade C2).
• A myeloablative MUD AlloSCT is not recommended except in the context of a clinical trial
(Grade C2).
• A RIC MFD or MUD AlloSCT is a clinical option for selected patients preferably in the
context of a clinical trial. If carried out, RIC AlloSCT should generally be performed
following an autograft, early in the disease course in patients with responsive disease (Grade
C2)
• DLI should be considered for patients with persistent or progressive disease following
transplantation or for mixed chimerism. If given for disease progression, cytoreduction
should probably be carried out first (Grade C2). Effective doses of DLI are associated with
a significant risk of GVHD
11. Maintenance therapy
With the introduction of new agents, there is increasing interest in the role of maintenance therapy.
No benefit has been demonstrated for the role of maintenance with chemotherapy (Belch et al,
1988; Drayson et al, 1998).
11.1. α-Interferon (IFN-α)
Many studies of IFN-α as maintenance have been carried out and have given conflicting results, but a
meta-analysis of randomized trials (Fritz and Ludwig 2000) showed that although IFN-α results in
moderate prolongation of PFS, the benefit in terms of OS is only minimal. In addition, IFN-α is
associated with significant toxicity - in one trial more than one third of patients had to discontinue
treatment due to side-effects (Schaar et al, 2005). This toxicity, the marginal benefits and the
associated cost of long-term treatment have meant that IFN-α maintenance is no longer considered
standard therapy.
11.2. Glucocorticoids
Corticosteroid maintenance was evaluated in 125 patients who were treated with either 50 mg or
10 mg of prednisolone on alternate days after induction therapy with VAD (Berenson et al, 2002).
Therapy was continued until disease progression. EFS was significantly longer in the 50 mg group (14
vs. 5 months, p=0.003) as well as OS (37 vs. 26 months, p=0.05). This effect was not confirmed,
however, in a multi-centre Canadian study, which randomized 292 patients to dexamethasone
maintenance after induction treatment with either MP or M-Dex (Shustik et al, 2007). PFS was
improved in the dexamethasone arm (2.8 years vs. 2.1 years, p=0.0002) but no difference in OS was
observed. In addition, there were significantly more non-haematological toxicities reported in the

dexamethasone arm including hyperglycaemia (44% vs 27%) and infections (40% vs 27%). Currently,
steroid maintenance is not recommended but trials of its use in combination with novel agents are
ongoing.
11.3. Thalidomide
Several randomized prospective studies have investigated thalidomide as potential maintenance

therapy post-ASCT and are summarized in Table 9 of Appendix 3. A recent meta-analysis assessed 4
randomized controlled trials investigating thalidomide maintenance (Hicks et al, 2008). An OS
benefit in favour of thalidomide became apparent when the Barlogie trial (Barlogie et al 2006b) was
excluded.
In the IFM-99 02 study, patients with deletion of chromosome 13 and patients who achieved at least
a VGPR did not benefit from thalidomide maintenance (Attal et al, 2006). A dose finding study of
thalidomide maintenance post-autograft showed significantly higher discontinuation rates due to
toxicity at doses above 150 mg but no difference in EFS suggesting that lower doses are better
tolerated but equally effective (Feyler et al, 2007). VTE was not significantly increased. In
combination with prednisolone, lower doses of thalidomide (200 mg plus 50 mg prednisolone) are
better tolerated than higher doses (400 mg plus 50 mg prednisolone) (Stewart et al, 2004). Long
term treatment with thalidomide (>12 months) is associated with a very high incidence of peripheral
neuropathy of approximately 75% (Tosi et al, 2005).
11.4 Bortezomib
Bortezomib in the maintenance setting has been shown to be beneficial following stem cell
transplantation in a large phase III randomized study with superior response and PFS rates in the
PAD arm compared to thalidomide in the VAD arm (Sonneveld et al, 2008). In elderly patients,
bortezomib (in combination with either thalidomide or prednisolone) maintenance has been studied
following induction therapy with either bortezomib, melphalan and prednisolone (VMP) or
bortezomib, thalidomide and prednisolone (VTP) (Mateos et al, 2010). 178 patients were randomly
assigned into either maintenance arm for up to 3 years. A complete remission rate of 42% was
achieved after maintenance therapy (44% bortezomib plus thalidomide, 39% bortezomib plus
prednisolone). This was an improvement of response rates after induction of 28% in the VTP group
and 20% in the VMP group. After maintenance, no grade 3 haematological toxicities and low level
peripheral neuropathy (2% bortezomib plus prednisolone, 7% bortezomib plus thalidomide) was
detected. In another study of newly diagnosed elderly patients, maintenance with bortezomib plus
thalidomide did not increase the response to induction with the 4-drug combination of VMP plus
thalidomide (VMPT) (Boccadoro et al, 2010).

11.5 Lenalidomide
Given the toxicity of thalidomide, in particular peripheral neuropathy, lenalidomide would be an

attractive alternative in the maintenance setting. In a phase III study, 614 patients age ≤ 65 years
were randomized after ASCT to lenalidomide consolidation (25 mg on 21 days per month for 2
months) followed by lenalidomide maintenance (10-15 mg daily until relapse) or placebo (Attal et al,
2010). Maintenance with lenalidomide improved the 3-year PFS significantly, at 68% versus 35% with
placebo with similar 2-year OS. Another phase III randomized study investigated maintenance
lenalidomide 10 mg/day escalated to 15 mg/day after 3 months until disease progression in 418
patients age ≤70 years after ASCT (McCarthy et al, 2010) with significantly improved TTP (25.5
months in placebo arm vs. not reached in lenalidomide arm) after 12 months follow up. OS and
adverse events were similar in both arms. Lenalidomide maintenance in elderly patients (age 65-75
years) after reduced dose ASCT (tandem 100 mg/m2 melphalan) also resulted in improved CR rates
(66% vs. 38% after ASCT) with acceptable toxicity in a phase II study of 102 patients (Palumbo et al,
2010).
Recommendations (Grade C recommendation, level IV evidence unless stated)

• IFN-α or single-agent corticosteroids cannot be routinely recommended as maintenance
therapy (Grade A). In the allograft setting, IFN-α may be useful for patients who have not achieved
a CR (Grade C2).
• Maintenance with single agent thalidomide therapy may improve EFS and OS in patients who
did not achieve VGPR post high-dose therapy and in this setting maintenance therapy could be
considered (Grade C2). Patients with deletion 13q may not benefit (Grade C2)
• The dose of thalidomide should not exceed 150 mg (grade B, level IIa recommendation) and
no recommendation can be made with regards to the duration of thalidomide maintenance (Grade
C2)
• In the maintenance setting, routine anticoagulant prophylaxis is not required. (Grade B1)
• At present, there is no evidence of benefit for the use of thalidomide maintenance in elderly
patients who did not undergo autologous transplantation. (Grade C2)
• The combination of steroids and thalidomide is not recommended in the maintenance setting
due to increase toxicity and unclear benefit over thalidomide alone. (Grade B1)
• Although promising data are emerging for the use of bortezomib or lenalidomide in the
maintenance setting, long term published data are still awaited to be able to recommend their
use outside clinical trials (Grade C2)
12. Management of relapsed myeloma including drugs in development

The introduction of a number of active anti-myeloma agents with mechanisms of action different
from chemotherapy has increased the options available for patients in the relapse setting. Despite
this, resistance usually develops over time. For most patients, the aims of treatment are similar to
those at diagnosis - to achieve disease control, ameliorate symptoms, improve quality of life and
prolong survival. However, for significant numbers of patients, the side-effects of treatment limit the
choices available. Previously it was thought that early relapse carried a poor prognosis and that
patients were likely to respond poorly to conventional chemotherapy but the introduction of
thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide has changed this.
Large data sets from randomized studies of traditional chemotherapy in relapsed patients do not
exist. The largest randomized studies in this setting have employed the newer agents, and include
the comparison of bortezomib against dexamethasone, and the comparison of lenalidomide and
dexamethasone against dexamethasone alone (Richardson et al, 2005; Dimopoulos et al, 2007;
Weber et al, 2007). Despite this lack of randomized data, some principles can be identified, based on
published studies and UK experience, which may influence the choice of treatment at relapse. These
include:
i. Re-exposure to the same treatment used at presentation is associated with increased rates of
treatment resistance. Short remission duration with a given treatment is a strong indicator to
employ an alternative regimen
ii. Single agent activity of the novel agents is limited and these agents should normally be given in
combination to maximize benefit
Because of disease heterogeneity and variability in patient-specific factors including co-morbidities
and the persistence of toxicities related to previous therapy, there can be no standard approach
recommended for the treatment at relapse. However, some of the evidence informing
recommendations for the treatment of relapsed myeloma in the UK is summarized below.
12.1 Use of novel agents at relapse
The 3 agents most often used in treating relapsed patients are thalidomide, bortezomib and
lenalidomide. They are generally used in combination with corticosteroids (pulsed or weekly
dexamethasone), and sometimes an alkylating agent, most commonly cyclophosphamide. The
evidence for efficacy and issues relating to toxicity for each are summarized below.
Thalidomide
Numerous studies have confirmed the efficacy of thalidomide in the relapsed and refractory setting
with a response rate of 30-40% when used alone (Barlogie et al, 2001) and 60% when used in
combination with dexamethasone (Dimopoulos et al, 2001; Palumbo et al, 2001). Synergy has been
further demonstrated by the observation that when thalidomide is combined with dexamethasone in
patients documented to be refractory to both drugs given separately (not necessarily sequentially)
up to 25% of patients will respond to the combination (Weber et al, 1999). The response rate is

increased further by the addition of chemotherapy. Numerous combinations of thalidomide with
cytotoxic chemotherapy in addition to dexamethasone have also been explored resulting in
improved response rates compared with the single agent. The most frequently used combination in
the UK is CTD with reported response rates of up to 80% (Dimopoulos et al, 2004; Garcia-Sanz et
al, 2004; Kropff et al, 2003; Kyriakou et al, 2005; Sidra et al, 2006).
Response to therapy is rapid with responding patients showing a decline in their M-protein in the
first 28 days, although the maximal response occurs considerably later than this (Waage et al, 2004).
The optimal dose remains unclear. Although in the original studies the target dose was 800 mg/day
this is rarely achievable and in a meta-analysis the median tolerated dose was 400 mg/day
(Glasmacher et al, 2006). The optimal duration of therapy has also not been defined. To date most
studies have dosed until progression or adverse events required discontinuation; in the CTD
regimen a maximum of 6 courses is usually given although in the relapse setting it is common for
thalidomide alone to be continued after completion.
Bortezomib
Bortezomib has US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Union (EU) licensing for
patients with relapsed myeloma and NICE approval as monotherapy for patients at first relapse. In a
phase III study, 669 patients with relapsed myeloma were randomized to either bortezomib or high
dose dexamethasone (Richardson et al, 2005), bortezomib demonstrated superiority with an
updated response rate of 42% compared to 18% in the dexamethasone group (P<0.001) and an
advantage in both TTP (median 6.22 months vs 3.49 months, p<0.001) and OS (p< 0.001)
(Richardson et al, 2007) despite more than 60% cross-over to bortezomib from the dexamethasone
arm. In addition, 56% of patients improved their initial response with continued therapy, suggesting a
potential role for extended therapy.
Phase II data indicate improvement in response when dexamethasone is added in patients with a
sub-optimal response to bortezomib alone (Richardson et al, 2003). This is consistent with in vitro
data of additive cytotoxicity (Hideshima et al, 2001) and provides the rationale for the use of
bortezomib with dexamethasone at the commencement of therapy. In these studies, bortezomib
was administered twice a week by intravenous bolus for two weeks of a 21-day cycle up to a
maximum of 8 cycles, although the majority of responses occurred within three cycles.
Dexamethasone was given at 20 mg on the day of and the day after each bortezomib dose.
Many studies combining bortezomib with chemotherapeutic or other novel agents have also been
performed in the relapsed setting. A large phase III study comparing bortezomib and liposomal
doxorubicin to bortezomib alone demonstrated superior response rates and response duration for
the combination (Orlowski et al, 2007). Data from numerous phase II trials demonstrate other
combination approaches to be safe with higher response rates than with single agents. However,
longer follow up and data from randomized phase III studies are awaited.
Lenalidomide
In the EU, lenalidomide is licensed in combination with dexamethasone for the treatment of
myeloma patients who have received at least one prior therapy and, in the UK, recent National
Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance has approved the drug also in combination with
dexamethasone for the treatment of patients at second or greater relapse.
Lenalidomide is given at a dose of 25 mg/day orally for 21 days out of a 28-day cycle (Richardson et
al, 2002) with dexamethasone initially with three 40 mg/day for 4 day pulses per cycle, reducing to a
single pulse in subsequent cycles. Two phase III randomized, multi-centre, double-blind, placebo-
controlled studies using identical protocols have been carried out comparing its use to
dexamethasone alone (results summarized in (Dimopoulos et al, 2009a)). Results of the studies were
similar, showing significantly higher overall response rates in the lenalidomide/dexamethasone group
compared to the control group (60.6% versus 21.9%, p<0.001). At a median follow up of 48 months,
a pooled analysis of the 2 trials showed TTP and OS were also significantly longer in the
lenalidomide/dexamethasone group despite the fact that patients in the dexamethasone only arm
were allowed to receive lenalidomide treatment at relapse, and following the early unblinding of
these 2 studies, patients randomized to dexamethasone alone were offered lenalidomide
(Dimopoulos et al, 2009a).
Further analysis of these phase III trial results suggests that higher response rates and improved TTP
is achieved in patients treated at first relapse, compared to those treated at subsequent relapse
(65% versus 58% and 71 weeks versus 41 weeks respectively), although the outcomes for patients
treated later in their disease course were still significantly higher in the lenalidomide/dexamethasone
arms (Stadtmauer et al, 2009). Patients who had been exposed to thalidomide also benefited from
lenalidomide (54% response rate vs 15% in the dexamethasone arm) although response rates were
slightly lower compared to patients who had not been previously exposed to thalidomide (63% and
27% for lenalidomide/dexamethasone and dexamethasone respectively) (Wang et al, 2006). Grade 3
or 4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia occurred in 35% and 13%, respectively, in patients receiving
lenalidomide and dexamethasone for relapsed myeloma (Dimopoulos et al, 2009a).
12.2 Transplantation at relapse
High dose therapy and stem cell transplantation may be considered in patients who have not had a
prior stem cell transplant (Fermand et al, 1998). A second transplant can also be an effective strategy
in selected patients who relapse more than 18 months after an initial autograft and this is currently
under investigation in a randomized trial in the UK. This is discussed in more detail in section 9.4.
12.3 Combinations of novel agents and newer anti-myeloma therapies
Ongoing phase II and III studies are comparing combinations of the above agents as therapy both at
relapse and in the front line setting. Initial results are very promising and suggest that combinations
of lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone, and bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone
are well tolerated and give high response rates.
12.4 Drugs in development

Many new drugs are in development. Promising results in early trials have been reported with several
drugs including second and third generation immunomodulatory drugs, such as pomalidomide (Lacy et
al, 2009), proteasome inhibitors including carfilzomib (O’Connor et al, 2009) and alkylating agents
such as bendamustine (Pönisch et al, 2008). High response rates have been reported with good side-
effect profiles, although the studies are too early to comment on any survival benefits.
In addition, the safety and efficacy of a number of novel anti-myeloma therapies is currently being
explored in clinical trials, either as single agents or in combination with more traditional
chemotherapeutics. Examples include target-specific compounds such as AKT, fibroblast growth
factor receptor 3 and interleukin-6 inhibitors, heat shock protein 90 inhibitors and chromatin
structure modifiying agents, such as histone deacetylase inhibitors and demethylating agents. Pre-
clinical in-vitro and in-vivo studies are encouraging but there is currently not enough clinical evidence to
support their use outside of clinical trials.
12.5 Local radiotherapy
Some patients may relapse with local disease, eg. spinal plasmacytoma, with little evidence of active
disease elsewhere. Such patients, especially if they are beyond first relapse, may be treated with local
radiotherapy, avoiding the additional toxicity of systemic therapy, which would be an option for
subsequent disease re-activation.
12.6 Choice of treatment at relapse
Decisions regarding treatment at relapse should be made according to a number of factors including
the timing of relapse, efficacy and toxicity of drugs used in prior therapy (eg peripheral neuropathy),
age, BM and renal function, co-morbidities (eg. diabetes) and patient preference. A suggested
algorithm (see Appendix 5) takes these factors into account and provides broad guidance but it
should be noted that the evidence for recommending one treatment over another at specific time
points does not always exist. Despite this, there are a number of common treatment pathways
developed in the UK on the background of trial evidence, experience and NICE approvals. As far as
possible, treatment should be individualized and it should be recognized that it is not necessarily

best practice to mandate particular therapies at specified time points. In the future, it is likely that
therapy will be ‘risk-adapted’ and the presence or absence of specific prognostic factors may
determine choice of therapy (reviewed in (San Miguel et al, 2008a)) both at diagnosis and relapse.
Entry into clinical trials should be considered at each relapse.
Many patients in the UK will receive a thalidomide-based therapy at induction +/- HDT/ASCT. It is
recommended that these patients should be considered for bortezomib +/- steroids and/or
chemotherapy at first relapse. For some, this will not be considered the best therapy eg. patients
with pre-existing neuropathy, immobility, lack of venous access, or patient choice. Patients who
have enjoyed a long first plateau phase (>18 months) following their initial therapy, and are
unsuitable for bortezomib may be treated with the same regimen. Many patients will have
responded to thalidomide as their initial therapy, and such patients are likely to respond again at
relapse. The use of a second ASCT is discussed below and in Section 9.4.
Patients at second and subsequent relapse, or patients at first relapse intolerant of thalidomide or
bortezomib should be considered for lenalidomide. Patients presenting in renal failure should be
treated on a bortezomib-containing regimen, to achieve rapid reduction in light chain load to the
kidneys, and maximize chances of regaining renal function.
Recommendations
• The most appropriate management should be determined on an individual basis depending on

the timing of relapse, age, prior therapy, BM function and co-morbidities, and patient
preference (Grade A1)
• Extensive trial data support the use of thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide-based
regimens as treatment modalities at first and subsequent relapse (Grade A1)
• Clinical effectiveness of thalidomide, bortezomib and lenalidomide is not dependent on the
number of previous lines of therapy, or type of therapy previously received. (Grade C2)
• Unless contraindicated, treatment with thalidomide, bortezomib or lenalidomide treatment
should be delivered with dexamethasone +/- chemotherapy to increase the response rate.
(Grade A1)
• A second ASCT may be considered in patients who had a good response to the initial
transplant procedure (≥ 18 months to disease progression)(Grade B1)
• Where possible, patients should be treated in the context of a clinical trial. Phase I/II trials are
appropriate for patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma (Grade A1)
• Good supportive therapy is essential (Grade A1)

13. Patient Information and Support
Provision of information and support for patients and their carers is essential if a patient is to come to
terms with their diagnosis and make informed decisions about treatment options. It will also enable
them to understand the importance of compliance with treatment regimens that can be demanding.
Myeloma is an individual cancer affecting patients and their carers in many physical, emotional and
social ways. Therefore, information and support should, if possible, be tailored to individual needs.
As a minimum, it is important for patients and their families to understand the disease and the aims
and risks of treatment and that, although treatment is not curative, it will relieve symptoms, prolong
survival and improve quality of life; the positive aspects of treatment need to be stressed. They
should be aware that their treatment and care will have been discussed and agreed by an MDT and
should be given the details of key workers. Patients should be told about appropriate clinical studies
and be given a sufficient level of information and time to make an informed decision as to whether
to take part or not. Patients with myeloma should be aware of support networks in the community;
the specialist team should provide patients and their families with information on local support
networks, whether these are specific to myeloma or in relation to cancer generally.
Finally, the symptoms of myeloma and the side-effects of treatment may result in long-term disability
and preclude many patients from returning to work. High-dose and conventional chemotherapy
regimens also make employment impractical for periods of several months. Patients commonly need
advice on socio-economic problems resulting from the condition and its treatment. The specialist
team needs to be able to provide information on state benefits, e.g. Disability Living Allowance, and
other appropriate social services.
Key recommendations
• The diagnosis needs to be communicated honestly to the patient and their family without
delay
• Information should be communicated in a quiet area with privacy, ideally in the company of a
close relative and with the presence of a specialist nurse. The information needs of the patient’s
family need to be facilitated wherever possible
• Patients and their partners / carers should be given time to ask appropriate questions once they
have been given the diagnosis; this may be best be done after an interval of a few hours or days
• Patients should be made aware of appropriate clinical studies
• Treatment plans need to be communicated simply to the patient and his / her carer and should
be clearly written in the case record so that the information is readily accessible to other
members of the multi-disciplinary specialist team
• Patients need to be informed of the names of the key members of the specialist team who are in
charge of their care and given clear information on access to advice/support from the team
• At the end of a consultation it is recommended that patients and their family / carers have
written information on the condition. It should also guide patients and their family / carers on
access to other information services.
Useful information sources

Myeloma UK provides information and support to all those affected by myeloma and aims to
improve treatment and care through education, research, campaigning and awareness.
www.myeloma.org.uk
Leukaemia and lymphoma Research supports research in myeloma and also provides patient
information booklets. www.llresearch.org.uk
Macmilllan cancer support provides practical, medical and financial support to patients
www.macmillan.org.uk
References
Aitchison, R.G., Reilly, I.A., Morgan, A.G. & Russell, N.H. (1990) Vincristine, adriamycin and
high dose steroids in myeloma complicated by renal failure. British Journal of Cancer, 61,
765-766.
Al-Quran, S.Z., Yang, L., Magill, J.M., Braylan, R.C. & Douglas-Nikitin, V.K. (2007) Assessment
of bone marrow plasma cell infiltrates in multiple myeloma: the added value of CD138
immunohistochemistry. Human Patholology, 38, 1779-1787.
Alexanian, R., Barlogie, B. & Tucker, S. (1990) VAD-based regimens as primary treatment for
multiple myeloma. American Journal of Hematology, 33, 86-89.
Alexanian, R., Dimopoulos, M.A., Delasalle, K. & Barlogie, B. (1992) Primary dexamethasone
treatment of multiple myeloma. Blood, 80, 887-890.
Alexanian, R., Dimopoulos, M., Hester, J., Delasalle, K. & Champlin, R. (1994a) Early
myeloablative therapy for multiple myeloma. Blood, 84, 4278-4282.
Alexanian, R., Dimopoulos, M., Smith, T., Delasalle, K., Barlogie, B. & Champlin, R. (1994b)
Limited value of myeloablative therapy for late multiple myeloma. Blood, 83, 512-516.
Anderson, K.C. (2006) Advances in drug development: New drugs for multiple myeloma.
Clinical Advances in Hematology and Oncology, 4, 592-594.
Attal, M., Harousseau, J.L., Stoppa, A.M., Sotto, J.J., Fuzibet, J.G., Rossi, J.F., Casassus, P.,
Maisonneuve, H., Facon, T., Ifrah, N., Payen, C. & Bataille, R. (1996) A prospective,
randomized trial of autologous bone marrow transplantation and chemotherapy in
multiple myeloma. Intergroupe Francais du Myelome. New England Journal of Medicine,
335, 91-97.
Attal, M., Harousseau, J.L., Facon, T., Guilhot, F., Doyen, C., Fuzibet, J.G., Monconduit, M.,
Hulin, C., Caillot, D., Bouabdallah, R., Voillat, L., Sotto, J.J., Grosbois, B. & Bataille, R.
(2003) Single versus double autologous stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma.
New England Journal of Medicine, 349, 2495-2502.
Attal, M., Harousseau, J.L., Leyvraz, S., Doyen, C., Hulin, C., Benboubker, L., Yakoub Agha, I.,
Bourhis, J.H., Garderet, L., Pegourie, B., Dumontet, C., Renaud, M., Voillat, L.,
Berthou, C., Marit, G., Monconduit, M., Caillot, D., Grobois, B., Avet-Loiseau, H.,

Moreau, P. & Facon, T. (2006) Maintenance therapy with thalidomide improves
survival in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood, 108, 3289-3294.
Attal, M., Cristini, C., Marit, G., Caillot, D., Facon, T., Hullin, C., Moreau, P., Mathiot, C.,
Avet-Loiseau, H. & Harousseau, J.L. (2010) Lenalidomide maintenance after
transplantation for myeloma. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 15s (abstract 8018).
Augustson, B.M., Begum, G., Dunn, J.A., Barth, N.J., Davies, F., Morgan, G., Behrens, J., Smith,
A., Child, J.A. & Drayson, M.T. (2005) Early mortality after diagnosis of multiple
myeloma: analysis of patients entered onto the United kingdom Medical Research
Council trials between 1980 and 2002--Medical Research Council Adult Leukaemia
Working Party. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 9219-9226.
Avet-Loiseau, H., Garand, R., Lode, L., Robillard, N. & Bataille, R. (2003a) 14q32
Translocations discriminate IgM multiple myeloma from Waldenstrom's
macroglobulinemia. Seminars in Oncology, 30, 153-155.
Avet-Loiseau, H., Garand, R., Lode, L., Harousseau, J.L. & Bataille, R. (2003b) Translocation
t(11;14)(q13;q32) is the hallmark of IgM, IgE, and nonsecretory multiple myeloma
variants. Blood, 101, 1570-1571.
Avet-Loiseau, H., Moreau, P., Mathiot, C., Charbonnel, C., Caillot, D., Facon, T., Attal, M.,
Benboubker, L., Hulin, C., Marit, G., Minvielle, S. & Harousseau, J.-L. (2009) Induction
with velcade/dexamethasone partially overcomes the poor prognosis of t(4;14), but
not that of del(17p), in young patients with multiple myeloma. . Blood (ASH Annual
Meeting Abstracts), 114, Abstract 957.
Badros, A., Barlogie, B., Siegel, E., Morris, C., Desikan, R., Zangari, M., Fassas, A., Anaissie, E.,
Munshi, N. & Tricot, G. (2001a) Autologous stem cell transplantation in elderly
multiple myeloma patients over the age of 70 years. British Journal of Haematology,
114, 600-607.
Badros, A., Barlogie, B., Siegel, E., Roberts, J., Langmaid, C., Zangari, M., Desikan, R., Shaver,
M.J., Fassas, A., McConnell, S., Muwalla, F., Barri, Y., Anaissie, E., Munshi, N. & Tricot,
G. (2001b) Results of autologous stem cell transplant in multiple myeloma patients
with renal failure. British Journal of Haematology, 114, 822-829.
Barlogie, B., Jagannath, S., Vesole, D.H., Naucke, S., Cheson, B., Mattox, S., Bracy, D., Salmon,
S., Jacobson, J., Crowley, J. & Tricot, G. (1997) Superiority of tandem autologous
transplantation over standard therapy for previously untreated multiple myeloma.
Blood, 89, 789-793.
Barlogie, B., Desikan, R., Eddlemon, P., Spencer, T., Zeldis, J., Munshi, N., Badros, A., Zangari,
M., Anaissie, E., Epstein, J., Shaughnessy, J., Ayers, D., Spoon, D. & Tricot, G. (2001)
Extended survival in advanced and refractory multiple myeloma after single-agent
thalidomide: identification of prognostic factors in a phase 2 study of 169 patients.
Blood, 98, 492-494.
Barlogie, B., Kyle, R.A., Anderson, K.C., Greipp, P.R., Lazarus, H.M., Hurd, D.D., McCoy, J.,
Moore, D.F., Jr., Dakhil, S.R., Lanier, K.S., Chapman, R.A., Cromer, J.N., Salmon, S.E.,
Durie, B. & Crowley, J.C. (2006a) Standard chemotherapy compared with high-dose
chemoradiotherapy for multiple myeloma: final results of phase III US Intergroup Trial
S9321. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 929-936.
Barlogie, B., Tricot, G., Anaissie, E., Shaughnessy, J., Rasmussen, E., van Rhee, F., Fassas, A.,
Zangari, M., Hollmig, K., Pineda-Roman, M., Lee, C., Talamo, G., Thertulien, R., Kiwan,
E., Krishna, S., Fox, M. & Crowley, J. (2006b) Thalidomide and hematopoietic-cell
transplantation for multiple myeloma. New England Journal of Medicine, 354, 1021-1030.
Barri, Y.M., Munshi, N.C., Sukumalchantra, S., Abulezz, S.R., Bonsib, S.M., Wallach, J. &
Walker, P.D. (2004) Podocyte injury associated glomerulopathies induced by
pamidronate. Kidney International, 65, 634-641.

Belch, A., Shelley, W., Bergsagel, D., Wilson, K., Klimo, P., White, D. & Willan, A. (1988) A
randomized trial of maintenance versus no maintenance melphalan and prednisone in
responding multiple myeloma patients. British Journal of Cancer, 57, 94-99.
Belch, A.R., Bergsagel, D.E., Wilson, K., O'Reilly, S., Wilson, J., Sutton, D., Pater, J., Johnston,
D. & Zee, B. (1991) Effect of daily etidronate on the osteolysis of multiple myeloma.
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 9, 1397-1402.
Benson, D.M., Jr., Elder, P.J., Lin, T.S., Blum, W., Penza, S., Avalos, B., Copelan, E. & Farag, S.S.
(2007) High-dose melphalan versus busulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide as
preparative regimens for autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple
myeloma. Leukemia Research, 31, 1069-1075.
Berenson, J.R., Lichtenstein, A., Porter, L., Dimopoulos, M.A., Bordoni, R., George, S., Lipton,
A., Keller, A., Ballester, O., Kovacs, M., Blacklock, H., Bell, R., Simeone, J.F., Reitsma,
D.J., Heffernan, M., Seaman, J. & Knight, R.D. (1998) Long-term pamidronate
treatment of advanced multiple myeloma patients reduces skeletal events. Myeloma
Aredia Study Group. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16, 593-602.
Berenson, J.R., Rosen, L.S., Howell, A., Porter, L., Coleman, R.E., Morley, W., Dreicer, R.,
Kuross, S.A., Lipton, A. & Seaman, J.J. (2001) Zoledronic acid reduces skeletal-related
events in patients with osteolytic metastases. Cancer, 91, 1191-1200.
Berenson, J.R., Crowley, J.J., Grogan, T.M., Zangmeister, J., Briggs, A.D., Mills, G.M., Barlogie,
B. & Salmon, S.E. (2002) Maintenance therapy with alternate-day prednisone improves
survival in multiple myeloma patients. Blood, 99, 3163-3168.
Bird, J.M., Fuge, R., Sirohi, B., Apperley, J.F., Hunter, A., Snowden, J., Mahendra, P., Milligan, D.,
Byrne, J., Littlewood, T., Fegan, C., McQuaker, G., Pagliuca, A., Johnson, P.,
Rahemtulla, A., Morris, C. & Marks, D.I. (2006) The clinical outcome and toxicity of
high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with
myeloma or amyloid and severe renal impairment: a British Society of Blood and
Marrow Transplantation study. British Journal of Haematology, 134, 385-390.
Bird, J., Behrens, J., Westin, J., Turesson, I., Drayson, M., Beetham, R., D'Sa, S., Soutar, R.,
Waage, A., Gulbrandsen, N., Gregersen, H. & Low, E. (2009) UK Myeloma Forum
(UKMF) and Nordic Myeloma Study Group (NMSG): guidelines for the investigation of
newly detected M-proteins and the management of monoclonal gammopathy of
undetermined significance (MGUS). British Journal of Haematology, 147, 22-42.
Bjorkstrand, B., Lacobelli, S. & Hegenbart, A. (2009) Autologous stem cell transplantation
(ASCT) versus ASCT followed by reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allogeneic SCT
with identical sibling donor in previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM): a
prospective controlled trial by the EBMT. Bone Marrow Transplantation (abstract), 43,
223.
Blade, J. & Kyle, R.A. (1994) IgD monoclonal gammopathy with long-term follow-up. British
Journal of Haematology, 88, 395-396.
Blade, J., Samson, D., Reece, D., Apperley, J., Bjorkstrand, B., Gahrton, G., Gertz, M., Giralt,
S., Jagannath, S. & Vesole, D. (1998) Criteria for evaluating disease response and
progression in patients with multiple myeloma treated by high-dose therapy and
haemopoietic stem cell transplantation. Myeloma Subcommittee of the EBMT.
European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplant. British Journal of Haematology,
102, 1115-1123.
Blade, J., San Miguel, J.F., Fontanillas, M., Esteve, J., Maldonado, J., Alcala, A., Brunet, S., Garcia-
Conde, J., Besalduch, J., Moro, M.J., Fernandez-Calvo, J., Conde, E., Font, L., Gardella,
S., Carnero, M., Carbonell, F., Marti, J.M., Hernandez-Martin, J., Ortega, F., Besses, C.,
Ribera, J.M., Trujillo, J., Escudero, M.L., Rozman, C., Estape, J. & Montserrat, E. (2001)
Increased conventional chemotherapy does not improve survival in multiple myeloma:
long-term results of two PETHEMA trials including 914 patients. Hematology Journal, 2,
272-278.
Boccadoro, M., Bringhen, S., Gaidano, G., Ria, R., Offidani, M., Patriarca, F., Nozzoli, C.,
Musto, P., Petrucci, M. & Palumbo, A.P. (2010) Bortezomib, melphalan, prednisone,
and thalidomide (VMPT) followed by maintenance with bortezomib and thalidomide
(VT) for initial treatment of elderly multiple myeloma patients. Journal of Clinical
Oncology, 28, 15s (abstract 8013).
Bradwell, A.R., Carr-Smith, H.D., Mead, G.P., Harvey, T.C. & Drayson, M.T. (2003) Serum
test for assessment of patients with Bence Jones myeloma. Lancet, 361, 489-491.
Brenner, H., Gondos, A. & Pulte, D. (2009) Expected long-term survival of patients diagnosed
with multiple myeloma in 2006-2010. Haematologica, 94, 270-275.
Bruno, B., Rotta, M., Patriarca, F., Mordini, N., Allione, B., Carnevale-Schianca, F., Giaccone,
L., Sorasio, R., Omede, P., Baldi, I., Bringhen, S., Massaia, M., Aglietta, M., Levis, A.,
Gallamini, A., Fanin, R., Palumbo, A., Storb, R., Ciccone, G. & Boccadoro, M. (2007) A
comparison of allografting with autografting for newly diagnosed myeloma. New
England Journal of Medicine, 356, 1110-1120.
Capria, S., Petrucci, M.T., Pulsoni, A., Ribersani, M., Baldacci, E., de Propris, M.S. & Meloni, G.
(2006) High-dose idarubicin, busulphan and melphalan for autologous stem cell
transplantation in multiple myeloma responsive to DAV chemotherapy: comparison
with a historical control. Acta Haematologica, 115, 9-14.
Carlson, K., Hjorth, M. & Knudsen, L.M. (2005) Toxicity in standard melphalan-prednisone
therapy among myeloma patients with renal failure--a retrospective analysis and
recommendations for dose adjustment. British Journal of Haematology, 128, 631-635.
Cavo, M., Zamagni, E., Tosi, P., Tacchetti, P., Cellini, C., Cangini, D., de Vivo, A., Testoni, N.,
Nicci, C., Terragna, C., Grafone, T., Perrone, G., Ceccolini, M., Tura, S. & Baccarani,
M. (2005) Superiority of thalidomide and dexamethasone over vincristine-
doxorubicindexamethasone (VAD) as primary therapy in preparation for autologous
transplantation for multiple myeloma. Blood, 106, 35-39.
Cavo, M., Tosi, P., Zamagni, E., Cellini, C., Tacchetti, P., Patriarca, F., Di Raimondo, F., Volpe,
E., Ronconi, S., Cangini, D., Narni, F., Carubelli, A., Masini, L., Catalano, L., Fiacchini,
M., de Vivo, A., Gozzetti, A., Lazzaro, A., Tura, S. & Baccarani, M. (2007) Prospective,
randomized study of single compared with double autologous stem-cell transplantation
for multiple myeloma: Bologna 96 clinical study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 2434-
2441.
Cavo, M., Tacchetti, P., Patriarca, F., Petrucci, M.T., Pantani, L., Galli, M., Raimondo, F.D.,
Crippa, C., Bringhen, S., Offidani, M., Narni, F., Montefusco, V., Zamagni, E., Spadano,
T., Pescosta, N., Baldini, L., Cellini, C., Caravita, T., Ledda, A., Falcone, A., Tosi, P.,
Nozzoli, C., Zambello, R., Masini, L., Agostini, P., Fiacchini, M. & Baccarani, M. (2009)
A phase III study of double autotransplantation incorporating bortezomib-thalidomide-
dexamethasone (VTD) or thalidomide-dexamethasone (TD) for multiple myeloma:
superior clinical outcomes with VTD compared to TD. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting
Abstracts), 114, Abstract 351.
Chanan-Khan, A.A., Kaufman, J.L., Mehta, J., Richardson, P.G., Miller, K.C., Lonial, S., Munshi,
N.C., Schlossman, R., Tariman, J. & Singhal, S. (2007) Activity and safety of bortezomib
in multiple myeloma patients with advanced renal failure: a multicenter retrospective
study. Blood, 109, 2604-2606.
Chang, J.T., Green, L. & Beitz, J. (2003) Renal failure with the use of zoledronic acid. New
England Journal of Medicine, 349, 1676-1679.
Chen, N., Lau, H., Kong, L., Kumar, G., Zeldis, J.B., Knight, R. & Laskin, O.L. (2007)
Pharmacokinetics of lenalidomide in subjects with various degrees of renal impairment
and in subjects on hemodialysis. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 47, 1466-1475.
Child, J.A., Morgan, G.J., Davies, F.E., Owen, R.G., Bell, S.E., Hawkins, K., Brown, J., Drayson,
M.T. & Selby, P.J. (2003) High-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic stem-cell rescue
for multiple myeloma. New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 1875-1883.
Clark, A.D., Shetty, A. & Soutar, R. (1999) Renal failure and multiple myeloma: pathogenesis
and treatment of renal failure and management of underlying myeloma. Blood Reviews,
13, 79-90.
Clark, W.F., Stewart, A.K., Rock, G.A., Sternbach, M., Sutton, D.M., Barrett, B.J., Heidenheim,
A.P., Garg, A.X. & Churchill, D.N. (2005) Plasma exchange when myeloma presents as
acute renal failure: a randomized, controlled trial. Annals of Internal Medicine, 143, 777-
784.
Cocks, K., Cohen, D., Wisloff, F., Sezer, O., Lee, S., Hippe, E., Gimsing, P., Turesson, I., Hajek,
R., Smith, A., Graham, L., Phillips, A., Stead, M., Velikova, G. & Brown, J. (2007) An
international field study of the reliability and validity of a disease-specific questionnaire
module (the QLQ-MY20) in assessing the quality of life of patients with multiple
myeloma. European Journal of Cancer, 43, 1670-1678.
Coleman, R.E. (1997) Skeletal complications of malignancy. Cancer, 80, 1588-1594.
Corradini, P., Cavo, M., Lokhorst, H., Martinelli, G., Terragna, C., Majolino, I., Valagussa, P.,
Boccadoro, M., Samson, D., Bacigalupo, A., Russell, N., Montefusco, V., Voena, C. &
Gahrton, G. (2003) Molecular remission after myeloablative allogeneic stem cell
transplantation predicts a better relapse-free survival in patients with multiple
myeloma. Blood, 102, 1927-1929.
Corral, L.G. & Kaplan, G. (1999) Immunomodulation by thalidomide and thalidomide
analogues. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 58 Suppl 1, 1107-1113.
Crawley, C., Iacobelli, S., Bjorkstrand, B., Apperley, J.F., Niederwieser, D. & Gahrton, G.
(2007) Reduced-intensity conditioning for myeloma: lower nonrelapse mortality but
higher relapse rates compared with myeloablative conditioning. Blood, 109, 3588-3594.
Crawley, C., Lalancette, M., Szydlo, R., Gilleece, M., Peggs, K., Mackinnon, S., Juliusson, G.,
Ahlberg, L., Nagler, A., Shimoni, A., Sureda, A., Boiron, J.M., Einsele, H., Chopra, R.,
Carella, A., Cavenagh, J., Gratwohl, A., Garban, F., Zander, A., Bjorkstrand, B.,
Niederwieser, D., Gahrton, G. & Apperley, J.F. (2005) Outcomes for reduced-intensity
allogeneic transplantation for multiple myeloma: an analysis of prognostic factors from
the Chronic Leukaemia Working Party of the EBMT. Blood, 105, 4532-4539.
Croucher, P.I. & Apperley, J.F. (1998) Bone disease in multiple myeloma. British Journal of
Haematology, 103, 902-910.
D'Sa, S., Yong, K., Kyriakou, C., Bhattacharya, S., Peggs, K.S., Foulkes, B., Watts, M.J., Ings, S.J.,
Ardeshna, K.M., Goldstone, A.H. & Williams, C.D. (2004) Etoposide,
methylprednisolone, cytarabine and cisplatin successfully cytoreduces resistant
myeloma patients and mobilizes them for transplant without adverse effects. British
D'Sa, S., Abildgaard, N., Tighe, J., Shaw, P. & Hall-Craggs, M. (2007) Guidelines for the use of
imaging in the management of myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 137, 49-63.
Davies, F.E., Forsyth, P.D., Rawstron, A.C., Owen, R.G., Pratt, G., Evans, P.A., Richards, S.J.,
Drayson, M., Smith, G.M., Selby, P.J., Child, J.A. & Morgan, G.J. (2001) The impact of
attaining a minimal disease state after high-dose melphalan and autologous
transplantation for multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 112, 814-819.
De Rosa, L., Anghel, G., Pandolfi, A., Riccardi, M., Amodeo, R. & Majolino, I. (2004)
Hemopoietic recovery and infectious complications in breast cancer and multiple
myeloma after autologous CD34+ cell-selected peripheral blood progenitor cell
transplantation. International Journal of Hematology, 79, 85-91.
Dimopoulos, M.A., Palumbo, A., Delasalle, K.B. & Alexanian, R. (1994) Primary plasma cell
leukaemia. British Journal of Haematology, 88, 754-759.
Dimopoulos, M.A., Zervas, K., Kouvatseas, G., Galani, E., Grigoraki, V., Kiamouris, C.,
Vervessou, E., Samantas, E., Papadimitriou, C., Economou, O., Gika, D., Panayiotidis,
P., Christakis, I. & Anagnostopoulos, N. (2001) Thalidomide and dexamethasone
combination for refractory multiple myeloma. Annals of Oncology, 12, 991-995.
Dimopoulos, M.A., Hamilos, G., Zomas, A., Gika, D., Efstathiou, E., Grigoraki, V., Poziopoulos,
C., Xilouri, I., Zorzou, M.P., Anagnostopoulos, N. & Anagnostopoulos, A. (2004)
Pulsed cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone: an oral regimen for
previously treated patients with multiple myeloma. Hematology Journal, 5, 112-117.
Dimopoulos, M., Spencer, A., Attal, M., Prince, H.M., Harousseau, J.L., Dmoszynska, A., San
Miguel, J., Hellmann, A., Facon, T., Foà, R., Corso, A., Masliak, Z., Olesnyckyj, M., Yu,
Z., Patin, J., Zeldis, J.B. & Knight, R.D. (2007) Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for
relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 2123-
2132.
Dimopoulos, M.A., Chen, C., Spencer, A., Niesvizky, R., Attal, M., Stadtmauer, E.A., Petrucci,
M.T., Yu, Z., Olesnyckyj, M., Zeldis, J.B., Knight, R.D. & Weber, D.M. (2009a) Long-
term follow-up on overall survival from the MM-009 and MM-010 phase III trials of
lenalidomide plus dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple
myeloma. Leukemia, 23, 2147-2152.
Dimopoulos, M.A., Richardson, P.G., Schlag, R., Khuageva, N.K., Shpilberg, O., Kastritis, E.,
Kropff, M., Petrucci, M.T., Delforge, M., Alexeeva, J., Schots, R., Masszi, T., Mateos,
M.V., Deraedt, W., Liu, K., Cakana, A., van de Velde, H. & San Miguel, J.F. (2009b) VMP
(Bortezomib, Melphalan, and Prednisone) is active and well tolerated in newly
diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma with moderately impaired renal function,
and results in reversal of renal impairment: cohort analysis of the phase III VISTA
study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 27, 6086-6093.
Dispenzieri, A., Kyle, R.A., Katzmann, J.A., Therneau, T.M., Larson, D., Benson, J., Clark, R.J.,
Melton, L.J., 3rd, Gertz, M.A., Kumar, S.K., Fonseca, R., Jelinek, D.F. & Rajkumar, S.V.
(2008) Immunoglobulin free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for
progression of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma. Blood, 111, 785-789.
Djulbegovic, B., Wheatley, K., Ross, J., Clark, O., Bos, G., Goldschmidt, H., Cremer, F., Alsina,
M. & Glasmacher, A. (2002) Bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma. Cochrane Database
Systemic Reviews, 3, CD003188.
Drake, M.B., Iacobelli, S., van Biezen A., Morris C., Apperley J.F., Niederwieser D.,
Björkstrand B., Gahrton G.; European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation
and the European Leukemia Net. (2010) Primary plasma cell leukemia and autologous
stem cell transplantation. Haematologica, 95: 804-9
Drayson, M.T., Chapman, C.E., Dunn, J.A., Olujohungbe, A.B. & Maclennan, I.C. (1998) MRC
trial of alpha2b-interferon maintenance therapy in first plateau phase of multiple
myeloma. MRC Working Party on Leukaemia in Adults. British Journal of Haematology,
101, 195-202.
Drayson, M., Tang, L.X., Drew, R., Mead, G.P., Carr-Smith, H. & Bradwell, A.R. (2001) Serum
free light-chain measurements for identifying and monitoring patients with
nonsecretory multiple myeloma. Blood, 97, 2900-2902.
Drayson, M., Begum, G., Basu, S., Makkuni, S., Dunn, J., Barth, N. & Child, J.A. (2006) Effects
of paraprotein heavy and light chain types and free light chain load on survival in
myeloma: an analysis of patients receiving conventional-dose chemotherapy in Medical
Research Council UK multiple myeloma trials. Blood, 108, 2013-2019.
Drayson, M.T., Behrens, J., Cohen, D.R., Iggo, N., Gregory, W.M., Bell, S.E., Howie, A.,
Samson, D., Jackson, G.H. & Gaskin, G. (2009) Serum FLC levels can be reduced
rapidly ; lower levels are associated with renal recovery. Clinical Lymphoma and
Myeloma, 9 Suppl 1, Abstract 351.
Durie, B.G. (2006) The role of anatomic and functional staging in myeloma: description of
Durie/Salmon plus staging system. European Journal of Cancer, 42, 1539-1543.
Durie, B.G. & Salmon, S.E. (1975) A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation
of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to
treatment, and survival. Cancer, 36, 842-854.
Durie, B.G., Harousseau, J.L., Miguel, J.S., Blade, J., Barlogie, B., Anderson, K., Gertz, M.,
Dimopoulos, M., Westin, J., Sonneveld, P., Ludwig, H., Gahrton, G., Beksac, M.,
Crowley, J., Belch, A., Boccadaro, M., Cavo, M., Turesson, I., Joshua, D., Vesole, D.,
Kyle, R., Alexanian, R., Tricot, G., Attal, M., Merlini, G., Powles, R., Richardson, P.,
Shimizu, K., Tosi, P., Morgan, G. & Rajkumar, S.V. (2006) International uniform
response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia, 20, 1467-1473.
Einsele, H., Liebisch, P., Langer, C., Kropff, M., Wandt, H., Jung, W., Kröger, N., Engelhardt,
M., Ostermann, H., Mügge, L.-O., Wolf, H.-H., Hart, C., Metzner, B., Kaufmann, M.,
Gramatzki, M., Hertenstein, B., Fischer, T., Weisel, K., Dölken, G., Brugger, W.,
Gollasch, H., Maschmeyer, G., Pfreundschuh, M., Schmitz, N., Sezer, O., Heidemann,
E., Jäger, E., Kahl, C., Kiani, A., Dechow, T., Rösler, W., Simon, J.P., Dürk, H., Pflüger,
K.H., Bentz, M., Hess, G., Mergenthaler, H.-G., Straka, C., Hempel, D., Salwender, H.-
J., Fingerle-Rowson, G. & Knop, S. (2009) Velcade, intravenous cyclophosphamide and
dexamethasone (VCD) induction for previously untreated multiple myeloma (German
DSMM XIa trial). Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 114, Abstract 131.
Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou, V., Bamias, A., Gika, D., Simeonidis, A., Pouli, A., Anagnostopoulos,
A., Michali, E., Economopoulos, T., Zervas, K. & Dimopoulos, M.A. (2007) Renal failure
in multiple myeloma: incidence, correlations, and prognostic significance. Leukemia and
Lymphoma, 48, 337-341.
Endo, T., Okumura, H., Kikuchi, K., Munakata, J., Otake, M., Nomura, T. & Asakawa, H.
(1981) Immunoglobulin E (IgE) multiple myeloma: a case report and review of the
literature. American Journal of Medicine, 70, 1127-1132.
Eriksson, T., Hoglund, P., Turesson, I., Waage, A., Don, B.R., Vu, J., Scheffler, M. & Kaysen,
G.A. (2003) Pharmacokinetics of thalidomide in patients with impaired renal function
and while on and off dialysis. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 55, 1701-1706.
Facon, T., Mary, J.Y., Hulin, C., Benboubker, L., Attal, M., Pegourie, B., Renaud, M.,
Harousseau, J.L., Guillerm, G., Chaleteix, C., Dib, M., Voillat, L., Maisonneuve, H.,
Troncy, J., Dorvaux, V., Monconduit, M., Martin, C., Casassus, P., Jaubert, J., Jardel, H.,
Doyen, C., Kolb, B., Anglaret, B., Grosbois, B., Yakoub-Agha, I., Mathiot, C. & Avet-
Loiseau, H. (2007) Melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide versus melphalan and
prednisone alone or reduced-intensity autologous stem cell transplantation in elderly
patients with multiple myeloma (IFM 99-06): a randomised trial. Lancet, 370, 1209-
1218.
Fermand, J.P., Ravaud, P., Chevret, S., Divine, M., Leblond, V., Belanger, C., Macro, M.,
Pertuiset, E., Dreyfus, F., Mariette, X., Boccacio, C. & Brouet, J.C. (1998) High-dose
therapy and autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in multiple
myeloma: up-front or rescue treatment? Results of a multicenter sequential
randomized clinical trial. Blood, 92, 3131-3136.
Feyler, S., Rawstron, A., Jackson, G., Snowden, J.A., Cocks, K. & Johnson, R.J. (2007)
Thalidomide maintenance following high-dose therapy in multiple myeloma: a UK
myeloma forum phase 2 study. British Journal of Haematology, 139, 429-433.
Feyler, S., O'Connor, S.J., Rawstron, A.C., Subash, C., Ross, F.M., Pratt, G., Drayson, M.T.,
Ashcroft, J., Cook, G. & Owen, R.G. (2008) IgM myeloma: a rare entity characterized
by a CD20-CD56-CD117- immunophenotype and the t(11;14). British Journal of
Fietz, T., Rieger, K., Dimeo, F., Blau, I.W., Thiel, E. & Knauf, W.U. (2004) Stem cell
mobilization in multiple myeloma patients: do we need an age-adjusted regimen for the
elderly? Journal of Clinical Apheresis, 19, 202-207.
Finnegan, D.P., Kettle, P., Drake, M., Matthews, C., Alexander, H.D., Popat, R., Cavanagh, J.D.,
Wachsman, W. & Morris, T.C. (2006) Bortezomib is effective in primary plasma cell
leukemia. Leukemia and Lymphoma, 47, 1670-1673.

Fonseca, R., Van Wier, S.A., Chng, W.J., Ketterling, R., Lacy, M.Q., Dispenzieri, A., Bergsagel,
P.L., Rajkumar, S.V., Greipp, P.R., Litzow, M.R., Price-Troska, T., Henderson, K.J.,
Ahmann, G.J. & Gertz, M.A. (2006) Prognostic value of chromosome 1q21 gain by
fluorescent in situ hybridization and increase CKS1B expression in myeloma. Leukemia,
20, 2034-2040.
Fonseca, R., Bergsagel, P.L., Drach, J., Shaughnessy, J., Gutierrez, N., Stewart, A.K., Morgan,
G., Van Ness, B., Chesi, M., Minvielle, S., Neri, A., Barlogie, B., Kuehl, W.M., Liebisch,
P., Davies, F., Chen-Kiang, S., Durie, B.G., Carrasco, R., Sezer, O., Reiman, T., Pilarski,
L. & Avet-Loiseau, H. (2009) International Myeloma Working Group molecular
classification of multiple myeloma: spotlight review. Leukemia, 23, 2210-2221.
Fritz, E. & Ludwig, H. (2000) Interferon-alpha treatment in multiple myeloma: meta-analysis of
30 randomised trials among 3948 patients. Annals of Oncology, 11, 1427-1436.
Gahrton, G., Tura, S., Ljungman, P., Belanger, C., Brandt, L., Cavo, M., Facon, T., Granena, A.,
Gore, M., Gratwohl, A., Löwenberg, B., Nikoskelainen, J., Reiffers, J.J., Samson, D.,
Verdonck, L. & Volin, L. for the European Group for Bone Marrow Transplantation
(1991) Allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in multiple myeloma. European Group
for Bone Marrow Transplantation. New England Journal of Medicine, 325, 1267-1273.
Gahrton, G., Svensson, H., Cavo, M., Apperly, J., Bacigalupo, A., Bjorkstrand, B., Blade, J.,
Cornelissen, J., de Laurenzi, A., Facon, T., Ljungman, P., Michallet, M., Niederwieser,
D., Powles, R., Reiffers, J., Russell, N.H., Samson, D., Schaefer, U.W., Schattenberg, A.,
Tura, S., Verdonck, L.F., Vernant, J.P., Willemze, R. & Volin, L. (2001) Progress in
allogenic bone marrow and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation for multiple
myeloma: a comparison between transplants performed 1983-93 and 1994-98 at
European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation centres. British Journal of
Garban, F., Attal, M., Michallet, M., Hulin, C., Bourhis, J.H., Yakoub-Agha, I., Lamy, T., Marit,
G., Maloisel, F., Berthou, C., Dib, M., Caillot, D., Deprijck, B., Ketterer, N.,
Harousseau, J.L., Sotto, J.J. & Moreau, P. (2006) Prospective comparison of autologous
stem cell transplantation followed by dose-reduced allograft (IFM99-03 trial) with
tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (IFM99-04 trial) in high-risk de novo
multiple myeloma. Blood, 107, 3474-3480.
Garcia-Sanz, R., Orfao, A., Gonzalez, M., Tabernero, M.D., Blade, J., Moro, M.J., Fernandez-
Calvo, J., Sanz, M.A., Perez-Simon, J.A., Rasillo, A. & Miguel, J.F. (1999) Primary plasma
cell leukemia: clinical, immunophenotypic, DNA ploidy, and cytogenetic characteristics.
Blood, 93, 1032-1037.
Garcia-Sanz, R., Gonzalez-Porras, J.R., Hernandez, J.M., Polo-Zarzuela, M., Sureda, A.,
Barrenetxea, C., Palomera, L., Lopez, R., Grande-Garcia, C., Alegre, A., Vargas-Pabon,
M., Gutierrez, O.N., Rodriguez, J.A. & San Miguel, J.F. (2004) The oral combination of
thalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (ThaCyDex) is effective in
relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Leukemia, 18, 856-863.
Gay, F., Bringhen, S., Genuardi, M., Rossi, D., Ria, R., Romano, A., Ferrara, F., Di Renzo, N.,
Dominietto, A., Andriani, A., Rizzi, R., Vallone, R., Mele, G., Storti, S., Podda, L.,
Aitoro, G., Mettivier, V., Annibali, O., Rossini, F., Gentilini, P., Pavone, V., Giuliani, N.,
Rauco, A.M., Baraldi, A., Capaldi, A., Gherlinzoni, F., Gaidano, G., Boccadoro, M. &
Palumbo, A. (2009) The weekly infusion of bortezomib reduces peripheral neuropathy.
Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 114, Abstract 3887.
Gerull, S., Goerner, M., Benner, A., Hegenbart, U., Klein, U., Schaefer, H., Goldschmidt, H. &
Ho, A.D. (2005) Long-term outcome of nonmyeloablative allogeneic transplantation in
patients with high-risk multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 36, 963-969.
Glasmacher, A., Hahn, C., Hoffmann, F., Naumann, R., Goldschmidt, H., von Lilienfeld-Toal,
M., Orlopp, K., Schmidt-Wolf, I. & Gorschluter, M. (2006) A systematic review of

phase-II trials of thalidomide monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory
multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 132, 584-593.
Gore, M.E., Selby, P.J., Viner, C., Clark, P.I., Meldrum, M., Millar, B., Bell, J., Maitland, J.A.,
Milan, S., Judson, I.R., Tillyer, C., Selby, P.J. & McElwain, T.J.. (1989) Intensive treatment
of multiple myeloma and criteria for complete remission. Lancet, 2, 879-882.
Greipp, P.R., San Miguel, J., Durie, B.G., Crowley, J.J., Barlogie, B., Blade, J., Boccadoro, M.,
Child, J.A., Avet-Loiseau, H., Kyle, R.A., Lahuerta, J.J., Ludwig, H., Morgan, G., Powles,
R., Shimizu, K., Shustik, C., Sonneveld, P., Tosi, P., Turesson, I. & Westin, J. (2005)
International staging system for multiple myeloma. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 3412-
3420.
Gulbrandsen, N., Waage, A., Gimsing, P., Turesson, I., Juliusson, G., Abildgaard, N.,
Bjørkstrand, B., Carlson, K., Dahl, I.M., Forsberg, K., Knudsen, L.M., Nielsen, J.L.,
Mellqvist, U.H., Nesthus, I., Strandberg, M., Wisløff, F. & Fayers, P. (2008) A
randomised placebo controlled study with melphalan/prednisone vs
melphalan/prednisone/thalidomide: quality of life and toxicity. Haematologica, 95 (S1),
Abstract 0209.
Harousseau, J.L., Moreau, P., Attal, M., Facon, T. & Avet-Loiseau, H. (2005) Stem-cell
transplantation in multiple myeloma. Best Practice & Research Clinical Haematology, 18,
603-618.
Harousseau, J.L., Attal, M., Leleu, X., Troncy, J., Pegourie, B., Stoppa, A.M., Hulin, C.,
Benboubker, L., Fuzibet, J.G., Renaud, M., Moreau, P. & Avet-Loiseau, H. (2006)
Bortezomib plus dexamethasone as induction treatment prior to autologous stem cell
transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results of an IFM
phase II study. Haematologica, 91, 1498-1505.
Harousseau, J.L., Mathiot, C., Attal, M., Marit, G., Caillot, D., Hullin, C., Facon, T., Webb, I.,
Avet-Loiseau, H. & Moreau, P. (in press) Bortezomib/dexamethasone is superior to
vincristine-doxorubicin-dexamethasone as induction treatment prior to autologous
stem cell transplantion in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results of the IFM
2005/01 phase 3 trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology
Haslett, P.A., Hanekom, W.A., Muller, G. & Kaplan, G. (2003) Thalidomide and a thalidomide
analogue drug costimulate virus-specific CD8+ T cells in vitro. The Journal of Infectious
Diseases, 187, 946-955.
Haubitz, M. & Peest, D. (2006) Myeloma--new approaches to combined nephrological-
haematological management. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 21, 582-590.
Hicks, L.K., Haynes, A.E., Reece, D.E., Walker, I.R., Herst, J.A., Meyer, R.M. & Imrie, K. (2008)
A meta-analysis and systematic review of thalidomide for patients with previously
untreated multiple myeloma. Cancer Treatment Reviews, 34, 442-452.
Hideshima, T., Chauhan, D., Shima, Y., Raje, N., Davies, F.E., Tai, Y.T., Treon, S.P., Lin, B.,
Schlossman, R.L., Richardson, P., Muller, G., Stirling, D.I. & Anderson, K.C. (2000)
Thalidomide and its analogs overcome drug resistance of human multiple myeloma
cells to conventional therapy. Blood, 96, 2943-2950.
Hideshima, T., Richardson, P., Chauhan, D., Palombella, V.J., Elliott, P.J., Adams, J. & Anderson,
K.C. (2001) The proteasome inhibitor PS-341 inhibits growth, induces apoptosis, and
overcomes drug resistance in human multiple myeloma cells. Cancer Research, 61,
3071-3076.
Hjorth, M., Hellquist, L., Holmberg, E., Magnusson, B., Rodjer, S. & Westin, J. (1993) Initial
versus deferred melphalan-prednisone therapy for asymptomatic multiple myeloma
stage I--a randomized study. Myeloma Group of Western Sweden. European Journal of
Hughes, M., Soutar, R., Lucraft, H., Owen, R. & Bird, J. (2009) Guidelines on the diagnosis and
management of solitary plasmacytoma of bone, extramedullary plasmacytoma and multiple

solitary plasmacytomas: 2009 update
http://www.bcshguidelines.com/pdf/SBP_guideline_update_FINAL_190109.pdf.
Hulin, C., Facon, T., Rodon, P., Pegourie, B., Benboubker, L., Doyen, C., Dib, M., Guillerm, G., Salles,
B., Eschard, J.P., Lenain, P., Casassus, P., Azaïs, I., Decaux, O., Garderet, L., Mathiot, C.,
Fontan, J., Lafon, I., Virion, J.M., Moreau, P. (2009) Efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus
thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: IFM 01/01
trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 27: 3664-70.
Hunter, H.M., Peggs, K., Powles, R., Rahemtulla, A., Mahendra, P., Cavenagh, J., Littlewood,
T., Potter, M., Hunter, A., Pagliuca, A., Williams, C.D., Cook, G., Towlson, K., Marks,
D.I. & Russell, N.H. (2005) Analysis of outcome following allogeneic haemopoietic
stem cell transplantation for myeloma using myeloablative conditioning--evidence for a
superior outcome using melphalan combined with total body irradiation. British Journal
of Haematology, 128, 496-502.
Hutchison, C.A., Plant, T., Drayson, M., Cockwell, P., Kountouri, M., Basnayake, K., Harding,
S., Bradwell, A.R. & Mead, G. (2008) Serum free light chain measurement aids the
diagnosis of myeloma in patients with severe renal failure. BMC Nephrology, 22, 9-11.
Iggo, N., Winearls, C.G. & Davies, D.R. (1997) The development of cast nephropathy in
multiple myeloma. Quarterly Journal of Medicine, 90, 653-656.
International Myeloma Working Group (2003) Criteria for the classification of monoclonal
gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the. British Journal
Jagannath, S., Barlogie, B., Berenson, J.R., Singhal, S., Alexanian, R., Srkalovic, G., Orlowski,
R.Z., Richardson, P.G., Anderson, J., Nix, D., Esseltine, D.L. & Anderson, K.C. (2005a)
Bortezomib in recurrent and/or refractory multiple myeloma. Initial clinical experience
in patients with impared renal function. Cancer, 103, 1195-1200.
Jagannath, S., Durie, B.G., Wolf, J., Camacho, E., Irwin, D., Lutzky, J., McKinley, M., Gabayan,
E., Mazumder, A., Schenkein, D. & Crowley, J. (2005b) Bortezomib therapy alone and
in combination with dexamethasone for previously untreated symptomatic multiple
myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 129, 776-783.
Jakubowiak, A.J., Al-Zoubi, A., Kendall, T., Friedman, J., Ahmed, A., Khaled, Y., Mineishi, S. &
Kaminski, M.S. (2006) High rate of complete and near complete responses (CR/nCR)
after initial therapy with bortezomib (velcade®), doxil®, and dexamethasone (VDD) is
further increased after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Blood (ASH Annual
Jancelewicz, Z., Takatsuki, K., Sugai, S. & Pruzanski, W. (1975) IgD multiple myeloma. Review
of 133 cases. Archives of Internal Medicine, 135, 87-93.
Jantunen, E. (2006) Autologous stem cell transplantation beyond 60 years of age. Bone Marrow
Transplantation, 38, 715-720.
Johnson, W.J., Kyle, R.A., Pineda, A.A., O'Brien, P.C. & Holley, K.E. (1990) Treatment of renal
failure associated with multiple myeloma. Plasmapheresis, hemodialysis, and
chemotherapy. Archives of Internal Medicine, 150, 863-869.
Kairemo, K.J., Lindberg, M. & Prytz, M. (1999) IgE myeloma: a case presentation and a review
of the literature. Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation, 59, 451-456.
Kapoor, P., Kumar, S., Fonseca, R., Lacy, M.Q., Witzig, T.E., Hayman, S.R., Dispenzieri, A.,
Buadi, F., Bergsagel, P.L., Gertz, M.A., Dalton, R.J., Mikhael, J.R., Dingli, D., Reeder,
C.B., Lust, J.A., Russell, S.J., Roy, V., Zeldenrust, S.R., Stewart, A.K., Kyle, R.A., Greipp,
P.R. & Rajkumar, S.V. (2009) Impact of risk stratification on outcome among patients
with multiple myeloma receiving initial therapy with lenalidomide and dexamethasone.
Blood, 114, 518-521.
Kastritis, E., Anagnostopoulos, A., Roussou, M., Gika, D., Matsouka, C., Barmparousi, D.,
Grapsa, I., Psimenou, E., Bamias, A. & Dimopoulos, M.A. (2007) Reversibility of renal

failure in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with high dose
dexamethasone-containing regimens and the impact of novel agents. Haematologica,
92, 546-549.
Knudsen, L.M., Hippe, E., Hjorth, M., Holmberg, E. & Westin, J. (1994) Renal function in newly
diagnosed multiple myeloma--a demographic study of 1353 patients. The Nordic
Myeloma Study Group. European Journal of Haematology, 53, 207-212.
Knudsen, L.M., Hjorth, M. & Hippe, E. (2000) Renal failure in multiple myeloma: reversibility
and impact on the prognosis. Nordic Myeloma Study Group. European Journal of
Knudsen, L.M., Nielsen, B., Gimsing, P. & Geisler, C. (2005) Autologous stem cell
transplantation in multiple myeloma: outcome in patients with renal failure. European
Konduri, K., Sahota, S.S., Babbage, G., Tong, A.W., Kumar, P., Newman, J.T. & Stone, M.J.
(2005) Immunoglobulin M myeloma: evaluation of molecular features and cytokine
expression. Clinical Lymphoma, 5, 285-289.
Kröger, N., Sayer, H.G., Schwerdtfeger, R., Kiehl, M., Nagler, A., Renges, H., Zabelina, T.,
Fehse, B., Ayuk, F., Wittkowsky, G., Schmitz, N. & Zander, A.R. (2002) Unrelated
stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma after a reduced-intensity conditioning
with pretransplantation antithymocyte globulin is highly effective with low
transplantation-related mortality. Blood, 100, 3919-3924.
Kröger, N., Einsele, H., Wolff, D., Casper, J., Freund, M., Derigs, G., Wandt, H., Schäfer-
Eckart, K., Wittkowsky, G., Schmitz, N., Krüger, W., Zabelina, T., Renges, H., Ayuk, F.,
Krüll, A., Zander, A.; German Study- group Multiple Myeloma (DSMM). (2003)
Myeloablative intensified conditioning regimen with in vivo T-cell depletion (ATG)
followed by allografting in patients with advanced multiple myeloma. A phase I/II study
of the German Study-group Multiple Myeloma (DSMM). Bone Marrow Transplantation
31, 973-9.
Kröger, N., Shimoni, A., Zagrivnaja, M., Ayuk, F., Lioznov, M., Schieder, H., Renges, H., Fehse,
B., Zabelina, T., Nagler, A. & Zander, A.R. (2004) Low-dose thalidomide and donor
lymphocyte infusion as adoptive immunotherapy after allogeneic stem cell
transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood, 104, 3361-3363.
Kropff, M.H., Lang, N., Bisping, G., Domine, N., Innig, G., Hentrich, M., Mitterer, M., Sudhoff,
T., Fenk, R., Straka, C., Heinecke, A., Koch, O.M., Ostermann, H., Berdel, W.E. &
Kienast, J. (2003) Hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide in combination with pulsed
dexamethasone and thalidomide (HyperCDT) in primary refractory or relapsed
multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 122, 607-616.
Kumar, S., Lacy, M.Q., Dispenzieri, A., Rajkumar, S.V., Fonseca, R., Geyer, S., Allmer, C.,
Witzig, T.E., Lust, J.A., Greipp, P.R., Kyle, R.A., Litzow, M.R. & Gertz, M.A. (2004)
High-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma
poorly responsive to initial therapy. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 34, 161-167.
Kumar, S., Dispenzieri, A., Lacy, M.Q., Hayman, S.R., Buadi, F.K., Gastineau, D.A., Litzow,
M.R., Fonseca, R., Roy, V., Rajkumar, S.V. & Gertz, M.A. (2007) Impact of lenalidomide
therapy on stem cell mobilization and engraftment post-peripheral blood stem cell
transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Leukemia, 21, 2035-2042.
Kumar, S.K., Rajkumar, S.V., Dispenzieri, A., Lacy, M.Q., Hayman, S.R., Buadi, F.K., Zeldenrust,
S.R., Dingli, D., Russell, S.J., Lust, J.A., Greipp, P.R., Kyle, R.A. & Gertz, M.A. (2008a)
Improved survival in multiple myeloma and the impact of novel therapies. Blood, 111,
2516-2520.
Kumar, S.K., Dingli, D., Lacy, M.Q., Dispenzieri, A., Hayman, S.R., Buadi, F.K., Rajkumar, S.V.,
Litzow, M.R. & Gertz, M.A. (2008b) Autologous stem cell transplantation in patients of
70 years and older with multiple myeloma: Results from a matched pair analysis.
American Journal of Hematology, 83, 614-617.
Kumar, S., Hayman, S., Buadi, F., Lacy, M., Stewart, K., Allred, J., Lauman, K., McCarty, T.,
Bergsagel, L., Dingli, D., Fonseca, R., Gertz, M., Greipp, P., Lust, J., Russell, S., Reeder,
C., Witzig, T., Zeldenrust, S., Kyle, R., Rajkumar, S.V. & Dispenzieri, A. (2008c) Phase
II trial of lenalidomide (revlimidTM) with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (RCd)
for newly diagnosed myeloma. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 112, Abstract 91.
Kumar, A., Kharfan-Dabaja, M.A., Glasmacher, A. & Djulbegovic, B. (2009a) Tandem versus
single autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for the treatment of multiple
myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the National Cancer Institute,
101, 100-106.
Kumar, S., Flinn, I.W., Parameswaran, Hari, N., Callander, N., Noga, S.J., Stewart, A.K., Glass,
J., Raje, N., Rifkin, R.M., Shi, H., Webb, I.J., Richardson, P.G. & Rajkumar, S.V. (2009b)
Novel three- and four-drug combinations of bortezomib, dexamethasone,
cyclophosphamide, and lenalidomide, for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma:
encouraging results from the multi-center, randomized, phase 2 EVOLUTION Study.
Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 114, Abstract 127.
Kuruvilla J, Shepherd JD, Sutherland HJ, Nevill TJ, Nitta J, Le A, Forrest DL, Hogge DE, Lavoie
JC, Nantel SH, Toze CL, Smith CA, Barnett MJ, Song KW (2007). Long-term outcome
of myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. Biology of
Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 13, 925-31.
Kyle, R.A. (1975) Multiple myeloma: review of 869 cases. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 50, 29-40.
Kyle, R.A., Maldonado, J.E. & Bayrd, E.D. (1974) Plasma cell leukemia. Report on 17 cases.
Archives of Internal Medicine, 133, 813-818.
Kyle, R.A., Gertz, M.A., Witzig, T.E., Lust, J.A., Lacy, M.Q., Dispenzieri, A., Fonseca, R.,
Rajkumar, S.V., Offord, J.R., Larson, D.R., Plevak, M.E., Therneau, T.M. & Greipp, P.R.
(2003) Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clinic
Proceedings, 78, 21-33.
Kyle, R.A., Remstein, E.D., Therneau, T.M., Dispenzieri, A., Kurtin, P.J., Hodnefield, J.M.,
Larson, D.R., Plevak, M.F., Jelinek, D.F., Fonseca, R., Melton, L.J., 3rd & Rajkumar, S.V.
(2007) Clinical course and prognosis of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma.
New England Journal of Medicine, 356, 2582-2590.
Kyriakou, C., Thomson, K., D'Sa, S., Flory, A., Hanslip, J., Goldstone, A.H. & Yong, K.L. (2005)
Low-dose thalidomide in combination with oral weekly cyclophosphamide and pulsed
dexamethasone is a well tolerated and effective regimen in patients with relapsed and
refractory multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 129, 763-770.
Lacy, M.Q., Hayman, S.R., Gertz, M.A., Dispenzieri, A., Buadi, F., Kumar, S., Greipp, P.R.,
Lust, J.A., Russell, S.J., Dingli, D., Kyle, R.A., Fonseca, R., Bergsagel, P.L., Roy, V.,
Mikhael, J.R., Stewart, A.K., Laumann, K., Allred, J.B., Mandrekar, S.J., Rajkumar, S.V.
(2009) Pomalidomide (CC4047) plus low-dose dexamethasone as therapy for
relapsed multiple myeloma. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 27(30):5008-14.
Lahtinen, R., Laakso, M., Palva, I., Virkkunen, P. & Elomaa, I. (1992) Randomised, placebo-
controlled multicentre trial of clodronate in multiple myeloma. Finnish Leukaemia
Group. Lancet, 340, 1049-1052.
Lahuerta, J.J., Mateos, M.V., Martínez-López, J., Rosiñol, L., Sureda, A., de la Rubia, J., García-
Laraña, J., Martínez-Martínez, R., Hernández-García, M.T., Carrera, D., Besalduch, J.,
de Arriba, F., Ribera, J.M., Escoda, L., Hernández-Ruiz, B., García-Frade, J., Rivas-
González, C., Alegre, A., Bladé, J. & San Miguel, J.F. (2008) Influence of pre- and post-
transplantation responses on outcome of patients with multiple myeloma: sequential
improvement of response and achievement of complete response are associated with
longer survival. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26, 5775-5782.
Landgren, O., Kyle, R.A., Pfeiffer, R.M., Katzmann, J.A., Caporaso, N.E., Hayes, R.B.,
Dispenzieri, A., Kumar, S., Clark, R.J., Baris, D., Hoover, R. & Rajkumar, S.V. (2009)

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) consistently precedes
multiple myeloma: a prospective study. Blood, 113, 5412-5417.
Le Blanc, R., Montminy-Metivier, S., Belanger, R., Busque, L., Fish, D., Roy, D.C., Kassis, J.,
Boileau, J., Lavallee, R., Belanger, D., Letendre, F., Hebert, J., Sauvageau, G., Perreault,
C. & Roy, J. (2001) Allogeneic transplantation for multiple myeloma: further evidence
for a GVHD-associated graft-versus-myeloma effect. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 28,
841-848.
Lee CK, Barlogie B, Munshi N, Zangari M, Fassas S, Jacobson J, van Rhee F, Cottler-Fox M,
Muwalla F, Tricot G (2003a) DTPACE : an effective, novel combination chemotherapy
with thalidomide for previously treated patients with myeloma. J Clin Oncol; 21:2732-
9.
Lee, C.K., Badros, A., Barlogie, B., Morris, C., Zangari, M., Fassas, A., van Rhee, F., Cottler-
Fox, M., Jacobson, J., Thertulien, R., Muwalla, F., Mazher, S., Anaissie, E., Tricot, G..
(2003b) Prognostic factors in allogeneic transplantation for patients with high-risk
multiple myeloma after reduced intensity conditioning. Experimental Hematology. 31,
73-80.
Lee, C.K., Zangari, M., Barlogie, B., Fassas, A., van Rhee, F., Thertulien, R., Talamo, G.,
Muwalla, F., Anaissie, E., Hollmig, K. & Tricot, G. (2004) Dialysis-dependent renal
failure in patients with myeloma can be reversed by high-dose myeloablative therapy
and autotransplant. Bone Marrow Transplantation, 33, 823-828.
Lokhorst, H.M., Segeren, C.M., Verdonck, L.F., van der Holt, B., Raymakers, R., van Oers,
M.H., Barge, R.M., Schouten, H.C., Westveer, P.H., Steijaert, M.M., Cornelissen, J.J. &
Sonneveld, P. (2003) Partially T-cell-depleted allogeneic stem-cell transplantation for
first-line treatment of multiple myeloma: a prospective evaluation of patients treated in
the phase III study HOVON 24 MM. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 21, 1728-1733.
Lokhorst, H.M., Wu, K., Verdonck, L.F., Laterveer, L.L., van de Donk, N.W., van Oers, M.H.,
Cornelissen, J.J. & Schattenberg, A.V. (2004) The occurrence of graft-versus-host
disease is the major predictive factor for response to donor lymphocyte infusions in
Lokhorst, H., Sonneveld, P. & Van der Holt, B. (2008) Donor versus no donor analysis of
newly diagnosed myeloma patients included in the HOVON 50/54 study. Blood (ASH
Annual Meeting Abstracts), 112, 461.
Lokhorst, H.M., van der Holt, B., Zweegman, S., Vellenga, E., Croockewit, S., van Oers, M.H.,
von dem Borne, P., Wijermans, P., Schaafsma, R., de Weerdt, O., Wittebol, S.,
Delforge, M., Berenschot, H., Bos, G.M., Jie, K.S., Sinnige, H., van Marwijk-Kooy, M.,
Joosten, P., Minnema, M.C., van Ammerlaan, R. & Sonneveld, P. (2010) Dutch-Belgian
Hemato-Oncology Group (HOVON). A randomized phase 3 study on the effect of
thalidomide combined with adriamycin, dexamethasone, and high-dose melphalan,
followed by thalidomide maintenance in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood, 115,
1113-1120.
Lonial, S. & Cavenagh, J. (2009) Emerging combination treatment strategies containing novel
agents in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 145, 681-
708.
Ludwig, H., Hajek, R., Tóthová, E., Drach, J., Adam, Z., Labar, B., Egyed, M., Spicka, I.,
Gisslinger, H., Greil, R., Kuhn, I., Zojer, N. & Hinke, A. (2009a) Thalidomide-
dexamethasone compared with melphalan-prednisolone in elderly patients with
Ludwig H., Adam Z., Greil R., Tthov E., Keil F., Zojer N., Thaler J., Gisslinger H., Egyed M.,
Lang A. (2009b) Reversal of acute renal impairment by bortezomib-doxorubicin-
dexamethasone (BDD) in multiple myeloma. Results from a Phase II study.
Haematologica. 94, 154 (abstract 0385).

Macro, M., Divine, M., Uzunhan, Y., Jaccard, A., Bouscary, D., Leblond, V., Janvier, M., Genet,
P., Castaigne, S., Royer, B., Allard, C., Chevret, S. & Fermand, J.-P. (2006)
Dexamethasone+thalidomide (Dex/Thal) compared to VAD as a pre-transplant
treatment in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM): A randomized trial. Blood (ASH
Annual Meeting Abstracts), 108, Abstract 57.
Major, P., Lortholary, A., Hon, J., Abdi, E., Mills, G., Menssen, H.D., Yunus, F., Bell, R., Body, J.,
Quebe-Fehling, E. & Seaman, J. (2001) Zoledronic acid is superior to pamidronate in
the treatment of hypercalcemia of malignancy: a pooled analysis of two randomized,
controlled clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19, 558-567.
Maloney, D.G., Molina, A.J., Sahebi, F., Stockerl-Goldstein, K.E., Sandmaier, B.M., Bensinger,
W., Storer, B., Hegenbart, U., Somlo, G., Chauncey, T., Bruno, B., Appelbaum, F.R.,
Blume, K.G., Forman, S.J., McSweeney, P. & Storb, R. (2003) Allografting with
nonmyeloablative conditioning following cytoreductive autografts for the treatment of
patients with multiple myeloma. Blood, 102, 3447-3454.
Mark, T., Stern, J., Furst, J.R., Jayabalan, D., Zafar, F., LaRow, A., Pearse, R.N., Harpel, J.,
Shore, T., Schuster, M.W., Leonard, J.P., Christos, P.J., Coleman, M. & Niesvizky, R.
(2008) Stem cell mobilization with cyclophosphamide overcomes the suppressive
effect of lenalidomide therapy on stem cell collection in multiple myeloma. Biology of
Blood and Marrow Transplantation, 14, 795-798.
Mateos, M.V., Hernández, J.M., Hernández, M.T., Gutiérrez, N.C., Palomera, L., Fuertes, M.,
Garcia-Sanchez, P., Lahuerta, J.J., de la Rubia, J., Terol, M.J., Sureda, A., Bargay, J., Ribas,
P., Alegre, A., de Arriba, F., Oriol, A., Carrera, D., García-Laraña, J., García-Sanz, R.,
Bladé, J., Prósper, F., Mateo, G., Esseltine, D.L., van de Velde, H. & San Miguel, J.F.
(2008) Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone in elderly untreated patients with
multiple myeloma: updated time-to-events results and prognostic factors for time to
progression. Haematologica, 93, 560-565.
Mateos, M.V., Oriol, A., Martínez-López, J., Gutiérrez, N., Teruel, A., de Paz, R., García-
Laraña, J., Bengoechea, E., Martín, A., Mediavilla, J.D., Palomera, L., de Arriba, F.,
González, Y., Hernández, J.M., Sureda, A., Bello, J.L., Bargay, J., Peñalver, F.J., Ribera,
J.M., Martín-Mateos, M.L., García-Sanz, R., Cibeira, M.T., Ramos, M.L., Vidriales, M.B.,
Paiva, B., Montalbán, M.A., Lahuerta, J.J., Bladé, J. & Miguel, J.F. (2010) Bortezomib,
melphalan, and prednisone versus bortezomib, thalidomide, and prednisone as
induction therapy followed by maintenance treatment with bortezomib and
thalidomide versus bortezomib and prednisone in elderly patients with untreated
multiple myeloma: a randomised trial. Lancet Oncology, 11: 934-41.
McCarthy, P.L., Owzar, K., Anderson, K.C., Hofmeister, C.C., Hassoun, H., Hurd, D.D.,
Stadtmauer, E.A., Giralt, S., Hars, V. & Linker, C.A. (2010) Phase III intergroup study of
lenalidomide versus placebo maintenance therapy following single autologous stem cell
transplant (ASCT) for multiple myeloma (MM): CALGB 100104. Journal of Clinical
Oncology, 28, 15s (abstract 8017).
McCloskey, E.V., MacLennan, I.C., Drayson, M.T., Chapman, C., Dunn, J. & Kanis, J.A. (1998)
A randomized trial of the effect of clodronate on skeletal morbidity in multiple
myeloma. MRC Working Party on Leukaemia in Adults. British Journal of Haematology,
100, 317-325.
McCloskey, E.V., Dunn, J.A., Kanis, J.A., MacLennan, I.C. & Drayson, M.T. (2001) Long-term
follow-up of a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial of
clodronate in multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 113, 1035-1043.
McElwain, T.J. & Powles, R.L. (1983) High-dose intravenous melphalan for plasma-cell
leukaemia and myeloma. Lancet, 2, 822-824.
Mead, G.P. & Drayson, M.T. (2009) Sensitivity of serum free light chain measurement of
residual disease in multiple myeloma patients. Blood, 114, 1717.
Mead, G.P., Carr-Smith, H.D., Drayson, M.T., Morgan, G.J., Child, J.A. & Bradwell, A.R. (2004)
Serum free light chains for monitoring multiple myeloma. British Journal of
Mehta, J. & Singhal, S. (2003) Hyperviscosity syndrome in plasma cell dyscrasias. Seminars in
Thrombosis and Hemostasis, 29, 467-471.
Menssen, H.D., Sakalova, A., Fontana, A., Herrmann, Z., Boewer, C., Facon, T., Lichinitser,
M.R., Singer, C.R., Euller-Ziegler, L., Wetterwald, M., Fiere, D., Hrubisko, M., Thiel, E.
& Delmas, P.D. (2002) Effects of long-term intravenous ibandronate therapy on
skeletal-related events, survival, and bone resorption markers in patients with
advanced multiple myeloma. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 20, 2353-2359.
Mikhael, J.R., Samiee, S., Stewart, A.K., Chen, C., Trudel, S., Franke, N., Winter, A., Chang, H.
& Reece, D.E. (2004) Outcome after second autologous stem cell transplantation as
salvage therapy in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting
Mohty, B., El-Cheikh, J., Yakoub-Agha, I., Moreau, P., Harousseau, J.L. & Mohty, M. (2010)
Peripheral neuropathy and new treatments for multiple myeloma: background and
practical recommendations. Haematologica, 95, 311-319.
Mohty, M., Boiron, J.M., Damaj, G., Michallet, A.S., Bay, J.O., Faucher, C., Perreau, V., Bilger,
K., Coso, D., Stoppa, A.M., Tabrizi, R., Gastaut, J.A., Michallet, M., Maraninchi, D. &
Blaise, D. (2004) Graft-versus-myeloma effect following antithymocyte globulin-based
reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow
Transplantation, 34, 77-84.
Moreau, P., Facon, T., Attal, M., Hulin, C., Michallet, M., Maloisel, F., Sotto, J.J., Guilhot, F.,
Marit, G., Doyen, C., Jaubert, J., Fuzibet, J.G., Francois, S., Benboubker, L., Monconduit,
M., Voillat, L., Macro, M., Berthou, C., Dorvaux, V., Pignon, B., Rio, B., Matthes, T.,
Casassus, P., Caillot, D., Najman, N., Grosbois, B., Bataille, R. & Harousseau, J.L.
(2002) Comparison of 200 mg/m(2) melphalan and 8 Gy total body irradiation plus
140 mg/m(2) melphalan as conditioning regimens for peripheral blood stem cell
transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: final analysis of the
Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome 9502 randomized trial. Blood, 99, 731-735.
Morgan, G.I., Davies, F.E., Gregory, W.M., Bell, S.E., Szubert, A.J., Cocks, K., Navarro Coy, N.,
Drayson, M.T., Owen, R.G., Ross, F.M., Jackson, G.H. & Child, J.A. (2009) The addition
of thalidomide to the induction treatment of newly presenting myeloma patients
increases the CR rate which is likely to translate into improved PFS and OS. Blood
(ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 114, 352.
Morgan G., Davies F., Gregory W., Bell S.E., Szubert A., Navarro Coy N., Drayson M., Owen
R.G., Jackson G.H., Child J.A. (2010 ) Evaluating the effects of zoledronic acid (ZOL)
on overall survival (OS) in patients (Pts) with multiple myeloma (MM): Results of the
Medical Research Council (MRC) Myeloma IX study J Clin Oncol 28:7s, (suppl; abstr
8021)
Morris, C., Iacobelli, S., Brand, R., Bjorkstrand, B., Drake, M., Niederwieser, D. & Gahrton, G.
(2004) Benefit and timing of second transplantations in multiple myeloma: clinical
findings and methodological limitations in a European Group for Blood and Marrow
Transplantation registry study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 1674-1681.
Morris, C.L., Siegel, E., Barlogie, B., Cottler-Fox, M., Lin, P., Fassas, A., Zangari, M., Anaissie, E.
& Tricot, G. (2003) Mobilization of CD34+ cells in elderly patients (>/= 70 years) with
multiple myeloma: influence of age, prior therapy, platelet count and mobilization
regimen. British Journal of Haematology, 120, 413-423.
Morris, C., Drake, M., Apperley, J., Iacobelli, S., van Biezen, S., Bjorkstrand, B., Goldschmidt,H.,
Jouet, J.P., Harousseau, J-L, Morgan, G., de Witte, T., Niederwieser, D., Gahrton, G. for
the myeloma subcommittee of the chronic leukaemia working party of the EBMT

(2010) Efficacy and outcome of autologous transplantation in rare myelomas.
Haematologica, in press
MRC Working Party for Therapeutic Trials in Leukaemia (1971) Myelomatosis: comparison
of melphalan and cyclophosphamide therapy. British Medical Journal, 1, 640-641.
MRC working party on leukaemia in adults (1984) Analysis and management of renal failure in
fourth MRC myelomatosis trial.. British Medical Journal, 288, 1411-1416.
Mulligan, G., Mitsiades, C., Bryant, B., Zhan, F., Chng, W.J., Roels, S., Koenig, E., Fergus, A.,
Huang, Y., Richardson, P., Trepicchio, W.L., Broyl, A., Sonneveld, P., Shaughnessy, J.D.,
Jr., Bergsagel, P.L., Schenkein, D., Esseltine, D.L., Boral, A. & Anderson, K.C. (2007)
Gene expression profiling and correlation with outcome in clinical trials of the
proteasome inhibitor bortezomib. Blood, 109, 3177-3188.
Munshi, N.C., Avet-Loiseau, H. & Anderson, K.C. (2009) Guidelines for Risk Stratification in
Multiple Myeloma . Report of the 2009 International Myeloma Workshop Consensus
Panel 2. http://www.mw-delhi09.com/spargoDocs/Consensuspaneltwo.pdf.
Musto, P., Falcone, A., Sanpaolo, G., Bodenizza, C., Cascavilla, N., Melillo, L., Scalzulli, P.R.,
Dell'Olio, M., La Sala, A., Mantuano, S., Nobile, M. & Carella, A.M. (2003) Pamidronate
reduces skeletal events but does not improve progression-free survival in early-stage
untreated myeloma: results of a randomized trial. Leukemia and Lymphoma, 44, 1545-
1548.
Musto, P., Petrucci, M.T., Bringhen, S., Guglielmelli, T., Caravita, T., Bongarzoni, V., Andriani,
A., D'Arena, G., Balleari, E., Pietrantuono, G., Boccadoro, M. & Palumbo, A. (2008) A
multicenter, randomized clinical trial comparing zoledronic acid versus observation in
patients with asymptomatic myeloma. Cancer, 113, 1588-1595.
Myeloma Trialists' Collaborative Group. (1998) Combination chemotherapy versus melphalan
plus prednisone as treatment for multiple myeloma: an overview of 6,633 patients
from 27 randomized trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16, 3832-3842.
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. (2003) Improving outcomes in
haematological cancers-The Manual. http://www.nice.org.uk/docref.asp?d=90429.
Ng, A.P., Wei, A., Bhurani, D., Chapple, P., Feleppa, F. & Juneja, S. (2006) The sensitivity of
CD138 immunostaining of bone marrow trephine specimens for quantifying marrow
involvement in MGUS and myeloma, including samples with a low percentage of
plasma cells. Haematologica, 91, 972-975.
Niesvizky, R., Jayabalan, D.S., Christos, P.J., Furst, J.R., Naib, T., Ely, S., Jalbrzikowski, J., Pearse,
R.N., Zafar, F., Pekle, K., Larow, A., Lent, R., Mark, T., Cho, H.J., Shore, T., Tepler, J.,
Harpel, J., Schuster, M.W., Mathew, S., Leonard, J.P., Mazumdar, M., Chen-Kiang, S. &
Coleman, M. (2008) BiRD (Biaxin [clarithromycin]/Revlimid
[lenalidomide]/dexamethasone) combination therapy results in high complete- and
overall-response rates in treatment-naive symptomatic multiple myeloma. Blood, 111,
1101-1109.
Oakervee, H.E., Popat, R., Curry, N., Smith, P., Morris, C., Drake, M., Agrawal, S., Stec, J.,
Schenkein, D., Esseltine, D.L. & Cavenagh, J.D. (2005) PAD combination therapy (PS-
341/bortezomib, doxorubicin and dexamethasone) for previously untreated patients
with multiple myeloma. British Journal of Haematology, 129, 755-762.
O'Connor, O.A., Stewart, A.K., Vallone, M., Molineaux, C.J., Kunkel, L.A., Gerecitano, J.F.,
Orlowski, R.Z. (2009)A phase 1 dose escalation study of the safety and
pharmacokinetics of the novel proteasome inhibitor carfilzomib (PR-171) in patients
with hematologic malignancies. Clinical Cancer Research,15: 7085-91.
Orlowski, R.Z., Nagler, A., Sonneveld, P., Bladé, J., Hajek, R., Spencer, A., San Miguel, J.,
Robak, T., Dmoszynska, A., Horvath, N., Spicka, I., Sutherland, H.J., Suvorov, A.N.,
Zhuang, S.H., Parekh, T., Xiu, L., Yuan, Z., Rackoff, W. & Harousseau, J.L. (2007)
Randomized phase III study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin plus bortezomib
compared with bortezomib alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma:
combination therapy improves time to progression. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25,
3892-3901.
Osterborg, A., Ehrsson, H., Eksborg, S., Wallin, I. & Mellstedt, H. (1989) Pharmacokinetics of
oral melphalan in relation to renal function in multiple myeloma patients. European
Journal of Cancer & Clinical Oncology, 25, 899-903.
Paiva, B., Vidriales, M.B., Cervero, J., Mateo, G., Perez, J.J., Montalban, M.A., Sureda, A.,
Montejano, L., Gutierrez, N.C., Garcia de Coca, A., de Las Heras, N., Mateos, M.V.,
Lopez-Berges, M.C., Garcia-Boyero, R., Galende, J., Hernandez, J., Palomera, L.,
Carrera, D., Martinez, R., de la Rubia, J., Martin, A., Blade, J., Lahuerta, J.J., Orfao, A. &
San Miguel, J.F. (2008) Multiparameter flow cytometric remission is the most relevant
prognostic factor for multiple myeloma patients who undergo autologous stem cell
transplantation. Blood, 112, 4017-4023.
Palumbo, A., Giaccone, L., Bertola, A., Pregno, P., Bringhen, S., Rus, C., Triolo, S., Gallo, E.,
Pileri, A. & Boccadoro, M. (2001) Low-dose thalidomide plus dexamethasone is an
effective salvage therapy for advanced myeloma. Haematologica, 86, 399-403.
Palumbo, A., Bringhen, S., Petrucci, M.T., Musto, P., Rossini, F., Nunzi, M., Lauta, V.M.,
Bergonzi, C., Barbui, A., Caravita, T., Capaldi, A., Pregno, P., Guglielmelli, T., Grasso,
M., Callea, V., Bertola, A., Cavallo, F., Falco, P., Rus, C., Massaia, M., Mandelli, F.,
Carella, A.M., Pogliani, E., Liberati, A.M., Dammacco, F., Ciccone, G. & Boccadoro, M.
(2004) Intermediate-dose melphalan improves survival of myeloma patients aged 50 to
70: results of a randomized controlled trial. Blood, 104, 3052-3057.
Palumbo, A., Bringhen, S., Caravita, T., Merla, E., Capparella, V., Callea, V., Cangialosi, C.,
Grasso, M., Rossini, F., Galli, M., Catalano, L., Zamagni, E., Petrucci, M.T., De Stefano,
V., Ceccarelli, M., Ambrosini, M.T., Avonto, I., Falco, P., Ciccone, G., Liberati, A.M.,
Musto, P. & Boccadoro, M. (2006) Oral melphalan and prednisone chemotherapy plus
thalidomide compared with melphalan and prednisone alone in elderly patients with
multiple myeloma: randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 367, 825-831.
Palumbo, A., Falco, P., Corradini, P., Falcone, A., Di Raimondo, F., Giuliani, N., Crippa, C.,
Ciccone, G., Omede, P., Ambrosini, M.T., Gay, F., Bringhen, S., Musto, P., Foa, R.,
Knight, R., Zeldis, J.B., Boccadoro, M. & Petrucci, M.T. (2007) Melphalan, prednisone,
and lenalidomide treatment for newly diagnosed myeloma: a report from the
GIMEMA-Italian Multiple Myeloma Network. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 4459-4465.
Palumbo, A., Bringhen, S., Liberati, A.M., Caravita, T., Falcone, A., V., C., Montanaro, M., Ria,
R., Capaldi, A., Zambello, R., Benevolo, G., Derudas, D., Dore, F., Cavallo, F., Gay, F.,
Falco, P., Ciccone, G., Musto, P., Cavo, M. & Boccadoro, M. (2008a) Oral melphalan,
prednisone, and thalidomide in elderly patients with multiple myeloma: updated results
of a randomized controlled trial. Blood, 112, 3107-3114.
Palumbo, A., Rajkumar, S.V., Dimopoulos, M.A., Richardson, P.G., San Miguel, J., Barlogie, B.,
Harousseau, J., Zonder, J.A., Cavo, M., Zangari, M., Attal, M., Belch, A., Knop, S.,
Joshua, D., Sezer, O., Ludwig, H., Vesole, D., Bladé, J., Kyle, R., Westin, J., Weber, D.,
Bringhen, S., Niesvizky, R., Waage, A., von Lilienfeld-Toal, M., Lonial, S., Morgan, G.J.,
Orlowski, R.Z., Shimizu, K., Anderson, K.C., Boccadoro, M., Durie, B.G., Sonneveld, P.
& Hussein, M.A. (2008b) Prevention of thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated
thrombosis in myeloma. Leukemia, 22, 414-423.
Palumbo, A., Dimopoulos, M.A., Delforge, M., Kropff, M., Foa, R., Yu, Z., Herbein, L., Mei, J.,
Jacques, C. & Catalano, J. (2009) A phase III study to determine the efficacy and safety
of lenalidomide in combination with melphalan and prednisone (MPR) in elderly
patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. . Blood (ASH Annual Meeting
Palumbo, A.P., Gay, F., Falco, P., Crippa, C., Montefusco, V., Patriarca, F., Rossini, F.,
Caltagirone, S., Benevolo, G., Pescosta, N., Guglielmelli, T., Bringhen, S., Offidani, M.,
Giuliani, N., Petrucci, M.T., Musto, P., Liberati, A.M., Rossi, G., Corradini, P. &
Boccadoro, M. (2010) Bortezomib as induction before autologous transplantation,
followed by lenalidomide as consolidation-maintenance in untreated multiple myeloma
patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 28, 800-807.
Penfield, J.G. (2006) Multiple myeloma in end-stage renal disease. Seminars in Dialysis, 19, 329-
334.
Perez-Persona, E., Vidriales, M.B., Mateo, G., Garcia-Sanz, R., Mateos, M.V., de Coca, A.G.,
Galende, J., Martin-Nunez, G., Alonso, J.M., de Las Heras, N., Hernandez, J.M., Martin,
A., Lopez-Berges, C., Orfao, A. & San Miguel, J.F. (2007) New criteria to identify risk
of progression in monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance and smoldering
multiple myeloma based on multiparameter flow cytometry analysis of bone marrow
plasma cells. Blood, 110, 2586-2592.
Perez-Simon, J.A., Martino, R., Alegre, A., Tomas, J.F., De Leon, A., Caballero, D., Sureda, A.,
Sierra, J. & San Miguel, J.F. (2003) Chronic but not acute graft-versus-host disease
improves outcome in multiple myeloma patients after non-myeloablative allogeneic
transplantation. British Journal of Haematology, 121, 104-108.
Pönisch, W., Rozanski, M., Goldschmidt, H., Hoffmann, F.A., Boldt, T., Schwarzer, A., Ritter,
U., Rohrberg, R., Schwalbe, E., Uhlig, J., Zehrfeld, T., Schirmer, V., Haas, A., Kreibich,
U., Niederwieser, D.; East German Study Group of Haematology and Oncology
(OSHO) (2008) Combined bendamustine, prednisolone and thalidomide for refractory
or relapsed multiple myeloma after autologous stem-cell transplantation or
conventional chemotherapy: results of a Phase I clinical trial. British Journal of
Haematology, 143:191-200.
Pratt, G. (2008) The evolving use of serum free light chain assays in haematology. British
Raab, M.S., Breitkreutz, I., Hundemer, M., Benner, A., Klaus, J., Hegenbart, U., Moehler, T.,
Ho, A.D., Zeier, M. & Goldschmidt, H. (2006) The outcome of autologous stem cell
transplantation in patients with plasma cell disorders and dialysis-dependent renal
failure. Haematologica, 91, 1555-1558.
Rades, D., Hoskin, P.J., Stalpers, L.J., Schulte, R., Poortmans, P., Veninga, T., Dahm-Daphi, J.,
Obralic, N., Wildfang, I., Bahrehmand, R., Engenhart-Cabilic, R. & Schild, S.E. (2006)
Short-course radiotherapy is not optimal for spinal cord compression due to
myeloma. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics, 64, 1452-1457.
Rajkumar, S.V., Hayman, S.R., Lacy, M.Q., Dispenzieri, A., Geyer, S.M., Kabat, B., Zeldenrust,
S.R., Kumar, S., Greipp, P.R., Fonseca, R., Lust, J.A., Russell, S.J., Kyle, R.A., Witzig, T.E.
& Gertz, M.A. (2005) Combination therapy with lenalidomide plus dexamethasone
(Rev/Dex) for newly diagnosed myeloma. Blood, 106, 4050-4053.
Rajkumar, S.V., Blood, E., Vesole, D., Fonseca, R. & Greipp, P.R. (2006) Phase III clinical trial of
thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with dexamethasone alone in newly
diagnosed multiple myeloma: a clinical trial coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative
Oncology Group. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 431-436.
Rajkumar, S.V., Rosinol, L., Hussein, M., Catalano, J., Jedrzejczak, W., Lucy, L., Olesnyckyj, M.,
Yu, Z., Knight, R., Zeldis, J.B. & Blade, J. (2008) Multicenter, randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled study of thalidomide plus dexamethasone compared with
dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Journal of
Clinical Oncology, 26, 2171-2177.
Rajkumar, S.V., Jacobus, S., Callander, N.S., Fonseca, R., Vesole, D.H., Williams, M.E.,
Abonour, R., Siegel, D.S., Katz, M. & Greipp, P.R. (2010) Lenalidomide plus high-dose
dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone as initial therapy
for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an open-label randomised controlled trial.
Lancet Oncology, 11, 29-37.
Rajkumar, S.V., Harousseau, J.L., Durie, B., Anderson, K.C., Dimopoulos, M., Kyle, R., Blade, J.,
Richardson, P., Orlowski, R., Siegel, D., Jagannath, S., Facon, T., Avet-Loiseau, H.,
Lonial, S., Palumbo, A., Zonder, J., Ludwig, H., Vesole, D., Sezer, O., Munshi, N.C. and
Miguel, J.S. (2011) Guidelines for the Uniform Reporting of Clinical Trials: Report of
the 2009 International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel I. Blood, in press.
Rawstron, A.C., Orfao, A., Beksac, M., Bezdickova, L., Brooimans, R.A., Bumbea, H., Dalva, K.,
Fuhler, G., Gratama, J., Hose, D., Kovarova, L., Lioznov, M., Mateo, G., Morilla, R.,
Mylin, A.K., Omede, P., Pellat-Deceunynck, C., Perez Andres, M., Petrucci, M., Ruggeri,
M., Rymkiewicz, G., Schmitz, A., Schreder, M., Seynaeve, C., Spacek, M., de Tute, R.M.,
Van Valckenborgh, E., Weston-Bell, N., Owen, R.G., San Miguel, J.F., Sonneveld, P. &
Johnsen, H.E. (2008) Report of the European Myeloma Network on multiparametric
flow cytometry in multiple myeloma and related disorders. Haematologica, 93, 431-
438.
Reece, D.E., Bredeson, C., Perez, W.S., Jagannath, S., Zhang, M.J., Ballen, K.K., Elfenbein, G.J.,
Freytes, C.O., Gale, R.P., Gertz, M.A., Gibson, J., Giralt, S.A., Keating, A., Kyle, R.A.,
Maharaj, D., Marcellus, D., McCarthy, P.L., Milone, G.A., Nimer, S.D., Pavlovsky, S., To,
L.B., Weisdorf, D.J., Wiernik, P.H., Wingard, J.R. & Vesole, D.H. (2003) Autologous
stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma patients <60 vs >/=60 years of age. Bone
Marrow Transplantation, 32, 1135-1143.
Reece, D.E., Flomenberg, N., Badros, A., Phillips, G.L., Filicko, J., Howard, D.S., Meisenberg,
B., Rapoport, A., Vesole, D.H. (2006) Update of melphalan 280 mg/m2 plus amifostine
cytoprotection before autologous stem cell transplantation as part of initial therapy in
multiple myeloma patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2006 ASCO Annual Meeting
Proceedings Part I, 24, 7608.
Reeder, C.B., Reece, D.E., Kukreti, V., Chen, C., Trudel, S., Hentz, J., Noble, B., Pirooz, N.A.,
Spong, J.E., Piza, J.G., Zepeda, V.H., Mikhael, J.R., Leis, J.F., Bergsagel, P.L., Fonseca, R. &
Stewart, A.K. (2009) Cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone induction
for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: high response rates in a phase II clinical trial.
Leukemia, 23, 1337-1341.
Riccardi, A., Mora, O., Tinelli, C., Valentini, D., Brugnatelli, S., Spanedda, R., De Paoli, A.,
Barbarano, L., Di Stasi, M., Giordano, M., Delfini, C., Nicoletti, G., Bergonzi, C.,
Rinaldi, E., Piccinini, L. & Ascari, E. (2000) Long-term survival of stage I multiple
myeloma given chemotherapy just after diagnosis or at progression of the disease: a
multicentre randomized study. Cooperative Group of Study and Treatment of Multiple
Myeloma. British Journal of Cancer, 82, 1254-1260.
Richardson, P.G., Schlossman, R.L., Weller, E., Hideshima, T., Mitsiades, C., Davies, F.,
LeBlanc, R., Catley, L.P., Doss, D., Kelly, K., McKenney, M., Mechlowicz, J., Freeman,
A., Deocampo, R., Rich, R., Ryoo, J.J., Chauhan, D., Balinski, K., Zeldis, J. & Anderson,
K.C. (2002) Immunomodulatory drug CC-5013 overcomes drug resistance and is well
tolerated in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma. Blood, 100, 3063-3067.
Richardson, P.G., Barlogie, B., Berenson, J., Singhal, S., Jagannath, S., Irwin, D., Rajkumar, S.V.,
Srkalovic, G., Alsina, M., Alexanian, R., Siegel, D., Orlowski, R.Z., Kuter, D., Limentani,
S.A., Lee, S., Hideshima, T., Esseltine, D.L., Kauffman, M., Adams, J., Schenkein, D.P. &
Anderson, K.C. (2003) A phase 2 study of bortezomib in relapsed, refractory
myeloma. New England Journal of Medicine, 348, 2609-2617.
Richardson, P.G., Sonneveld, P., Schuster, M.W., Irwin, D., Stadtmauer, E.A., Facon, T.,
Harousseau, J.L., Ben-Yehuda, D., Lonial, S., Goldschmidt, H., Reece, D., San-Miguel,
J.F., Blade, J., Boccadoro, M., Cavenagh, J., Dalton, W.S., Boral, A.L., Esseltine, D.L.,
Porter, J.B., Schenkein, D. & Anderson, K.C. (2005) Bortezomib or high-dose
dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma. New England Journal of Medicine, 352,
2487-2498.
Richardson, P.G., Blood, E., Mitsiades, C.S., Jagannath, S., Zeldenrust, S.R., Alsina, M.,
Schlossman, R.L., Rajkumar, S.V., Desikan, K.R., Hideshima, T., Munshi, N.C., Kelly-
Colson, K., Doss, D., McKenney, M.L., Gorelik, S., Warren, D., Freeman, A., Rich, R.,
Wu, A., Olesnyckyj, M., Wride, K., Dalton, W.S., Zeldis, J., Knight, R., Weller, E. &
Anderson, K.C. (2006) A randomized phase 2 study of lenalidomide therapy for
patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Blood, 108, 3458-
3464.
Richardson, P.G., Sonneveld, P., Schuster, M., Irwin, D., Stadtmauer, E., Facon, T., Harousseau,
J.L., Ben-Yehuda, D., Lonial, S., Goldschmidt, H., Reece, D., Miguel, J.S., Blade, J.,
Boccadoro, M., Cavenagh, J., Alsina, M., Rajkumar, S.V., Lacy, M., Jakubowiak, A.,
Dalton, W., Boral, A., Esseltine, D.L., Schenkein, D. & Anderson, K.C. (2007) Extended
follow-up of a phase 3 trial in relapsed multiple myeloma: final time-to-event results of
the APEX trial. Blood, 110, 3557-3560.
Richardson, P.G., Lonial, S., Jakubowiak, A.J., Jagannath, S., Raje, N.S., Avigan, D.E., Ghobrial, I.,
Schlossman, R.L., Mazumder, A., Munshi, N.C., Laubach, J., Vesole, D., Joyce, R.,
Rosenblatt, J., Xie, W., Doss, D., Warren, D.L., Ittleman, K., Revta, C., Francis, D.,
Leister, C., Kaster, S., Delaney, C., Lauria, M., Mitsiades, C.S., Hideshima, T., Knight,
R., Esseltine, D.-L., Weller, E. & Anderson, K.C. (2009) High response rates and
encouraging time-to-event data with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in
newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: final results of a phase I/II study. Blood (ASH Annual
Rosen, L.S., Gordon, D., Kaminski, M., Howell, A., Belch, A., Mackey, J., Apffelstaedt, J.,
Hussein, M., Coleman, R.E., Reitsma, D.J., Seaman, J.J., Chen, B.L. & Ambros, Y. (2001)
Zoledronic acid versus pamidronate in the treatment of skeletal metastases in patients
with breast cancer or osteolytic lesions of multiple myeloma: a phase III, double-blind,
comparative trial. Cancer Journal, 7, 377-387.
Rosen, L.S., Gordon, D., Kaminski, M., Howell, A., Belch, A., Mackey, J., Apffelstaedt, J.,
Hussein, M.A., Coleman, R.E., Reitsma, D.J., Chen, B.L. & Seaman, J.J. (2003) Long-term
efficacy and safety of zoledronic acid compared with pamidronate disodium in the
treatment of skeletal complications in patients with advanced multiple myeloma or
breast carcinoma: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, comparative trial. Cancer,
98, 1735-1744.
Rosiñol, L., Oriol, A., Mateos, M.V., Sureda, A., Garcia-Sanchez, P., Gutierrez, N., Alegre, A.,
Lahuerta, J.J., de la Rubia, J., Herrero, C., Liu, X., Van de Velde, H., San Miguel, J. &
Blade, J. (2007) Phase II PETHEMA trial of alternating bortezomib and dexamethasone
as induction regimen before autologous stem-cell transplantation in younger patients
with multiple myeloma: efficacy and clinical implications of tumor response kinetics.
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 4452-4458.
Rosiñol, L., Pérez-Simón, J.A., Sureda, A., de la Rubia, J., de Arriba, F., Lahuerta, J.J., González,
J.D., Díaz-Mediavilla, J., Hernández, B., García-Frade, J., Carrera, D., León, A.,
Hernández, M., Abellán, P.F., Bergua, J.M., San Miguel, J. & Bladé, J. (2008) A
prospective PETHEMA study of tandem autologous transplantation versus autograft
followed by reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic transplantation in newly
diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood, 112, 3591-3593.
Rosiñol, L., Cibeira, M.T., Martinez, J., Mateos, M.V., Oriol, A., Terol, M.J., García-Laraña, J.,
Hernández, D., Rubia, J.d.l., Sureda, A., Besalduch, J., Palomera, L., Gonzalez, Y.,
Echebeste, M.A., Díaz-Mediavilla, J., Arriba, F.d., Alegre, A., Hernández, M.T., Lahuerta,
J.J., Miguel, J.F.F.S. & Blade, J. (2009) Thalidomide / dexamethasone (TD) vs.
bortezomib (velcade)â/thalidomide / dexamethasone (VTD) vs.
VBMCP/VBAD/velcadeâ as induction regimens prior autologous stem cell
transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM): Results of a phase III
PETHEMA/GEM trial. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 114, Abstract 130.
Rotta, M., Storer, B.E., Sahebi, F., Shizuru, J.A., Bruno, B., Lange, T., Agura, E.D., McSweeney,
P.A., Pulsipher, M.A., Hari, P., Maziarz, R.T., Chauncey, T.R., Appelbaum, F.R., Sorror,
M.L., Bensinger, W., Sandmaier, B.M., Storb, R.F. & Maloney, D.G. (2009) Long-term
outcome of patients with multiple myeloma after autologous hematopoietic cell
transplantation and nonmyeloablative allografting. Blood, 113, 3383-3391.
Roussel, M., Moreau, P., Huynh, A., Mary, J.Y., Danho, C., Caillot, D., Hulin, C., Fruchart, C.,
Marit, G., Pégourié, B., Lenain, P., Araujo, C., Kolb, B., Randriamalala, E., Royer, B.,
Stoppa, A.M., Dib, M., Dorvaux, V., Garderet, L., Mathiot, C., Avet-Loiseau, H.,
Harousseau, J.L. & Attal, M. (2010) Bortezomib and high-dose melphalan as
conditioning regimen before autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with de
novo multiple myeloma: a phase 2 study of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome
(IFM). Blood, 115, 32-37.
Roussou, M., Kastritis, E., Migkou, M., Psimenou, E., Grapsa, I., Matsouka, C., Barmparousi, D.,
Terpos, E. & Dimopoulos, M.A. (2008) Treatment of patients with multiple myeloma
complicated by renal failure with bortezomib-based regimens. Leukemia and Lymphoma,
49, 890-895.
Samson, D., Gaminara, E., Newland, A., Van de Pette, J., Kearney, J., McCarthy, D., Joyner, M.,
Aston, L., Mitchell, T. & Hamon, M. (1989) Infusion of vincristine and doxorubicin with
oral dexamethasone as first-line therapy for multiple myeloma. Lancet, 2, 882-885.
San-Miguel, J.F. & Mateos, M.V. (2009) How to treat a newly diagnosed young patient with
multiple myeloma. Hematology 2009: American Society of Hematology Education
Program Program Book, 555-65.
San Miguel, J.F., Lahuerta, J.J., Garcia-Sanz, R., Alegre, A., Blade, J., Martinez, R., Garcia-Larana,
J., De La Rubia, J., Sureda, A., Vidal, M.J., Escudero, A., Perez-Esquiza, E., Conde, E.,
Garcia-Ruiz, J.C., Cabrera, R., Caballero, D., Moraleda, J.M., Leon, A., Besalduch, J.,
Hernandez, M.T., Rifon, J., Hernandez, F., Solano, C., Palomera, L., Parody, R.,
Gonzalez, J.D., Mataix, R., Maldonado, J., Constela, J., Carrera, D., Bello, J.L., De
Pablos, J.M., Perez-Simon, J.A., Torres, J.P., Olanguren, J., Prieto, E., Acebede, G.,
Penarrubia, M.J., Torres, P., Diez-Martin, J.L., Rivas, A., Sanchez, J.M. & Diaz-Mediavilla,
J. (2000) Are myeloma patients with renal failure candidates for autologous stem cell
transplantation? Hematology Journal, 1, 28-36.
San Miguel, J., Harousseau, J.L., Joshua, D. & Anderson, K.C. (2008a) Individualizing treatment
of patients with myeloma in the era of novel agents. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26,
2761-2766.
San Miguel, J.F., Schlag, R., Khuageva, N.K., Dimopoulos, M.A., Shpilberg, O., Kropff, M.,
Spicka, I., Petrucci, M.T., Palumbo, A., Samoilova, O.S., Dmoszynska, A., Abdulkadyrov,
K.M., Schots, R., Jiang, B., Mateos, M.V., Anderson, K.C., Esseltine, D.L., Liu, K.,
Cakana, A., van de Velde, H. & Richardson, P.G. (2008b) Bortezomib plus melphalan
and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. New England Journal of
Medicine, 359, 906-917.
San Miguel, J.F., Richardson, P.G., Sonneveld, P., Schuster, M.W., Irwin, D., Stadtmauer, E.A.,
Facon, T., Harousseau, J.L., Ben-Yehuda, D., Lonial, S., Goldschmidt, H., Reece, D.,
Blade, J., Boccadoro, M., Cavenagh, J.D., Neuwirth, R., Boral, A.L., Esseltine, D.L. &
Anderson, K.C. (2008c) Efficacy and safety of bortezomib in patients with renal
impairment: results from the APEX phase 3 study. Leukemia, 22, 842-849.
Schaar, C.G., Kluin-Nelemans, H.C., Te Marvelde, C., le Cessie, S., Breed, W.P., Fibbe, W.E.,
van Deijk, W.A., Fickers, M.M., Roozendaal, K.J. & Wijermans, P.W. (2005) Interferon-
alpha as maintenance therapy in patients with multiple myeloma. Annals of Oncology,
16, 634-639.
Shaughnessy, J.D., Jr., Zhan, F., Burington, B.E., Huang, Y., Colla, S., Hanamura, I., Stewart, J.P.,
Kordsmeier, B., Randolph, C., Williams, D.R., Xiao, Y., Xu, H., Epstein, J., Anaissie, E.,
Krishna, S.G., Cottler-Fox, M., Hollmig, K., Mohiuddin, A., Pineda-Roman, M., Tricot,
G., van Rhee, F., Sawyer, J., Alsayed, Y., Walker, R., Zangari, M., Crowley, J. & Barlogie,
B. (2007) A validated gene expression model of high-risk multiple myeloma is defined

by deregulated expression of genes mapping to chromosome 1. Blood, 109, 2276-
2284.
Shaw, B.E., Peggs, K., Bird, J.M., Cavenagh, J., Hunter, A., Alejandro Madrigal, J., Russell, N.H.,
Sirohi, B., Towlson, K., Williams, C.D. & Marks, D.I. (2003) The outcome of unrelated
donor stem cell transplantation for patients with multiple myeloma. British Journal of
Shustik, C., Belch, A., Robinson, S., Rubin, S.H., Dolan, S.P., Kovacs, M.J., Grewal, K.S., Walde,
D., Barr, R., Wilson, J., Gill, K., Vickars, L., Rudinskas, L., Sicheri, D.A., Wilson, K.,
Djurfeldt, M., Shepherd, L.E., Ding, K. & Meyer, R.M. (2007) A randomised comparison
of melphalan with prednisone or dexamethasone as induction therapy and
dexamethasone or observation as maintenance therapy in multiple myeloma: NCIC
CTG MY.7. British Journal of Haematology, 136, 203-211.
Sidra, G., Williams, C.D., Russell, N.H., Zaman, S., Myers, B. & Byrne, J.L. (2006) Combination
chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone for patients
with refractory, newly diagnosed or relapsed myeloma. Haematologica, 91, 862-863.
Siegel, D.S., Desikan, K.R., Mehta, J., Singhal, S., Fassas, A., Munshi, N., Anaissie, E., Naucke, S.,
Ayers, D., Spoon, D., Vesole, D., Tricot, G. & Barlogie, B. (1999) Age is not a
prognostic variable with autotransplants for multiple myeloma. Blood, 93, 51-54.
Sinclair, D. (2002) IgD myeloma: clinical, biological and laboratory features. Clinical Laboratory,
48, 617-622.
Sirohi, B., Powles, R., Mehta, J., Treleaven, J., Raje, N., Kulkarni, S., Rudin, C., Bhagwati, N.,
Horton, C., Saso, R., Singhal, S. & Parikh, R. (2001) The implication of compromised
renal function at presentation in myeloma: similar outcome in patients who receive
high-dose therapy: a single-center study of 251 previously untreated patients. Medical
Oncology, 18, 39-50.
Smith, A., Wisloff, F. & Samson, D. (2006) Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of
multiple myeloma 2005. British Journal of Haematology, 132, 410-451.
Snowden JA, Ahmedzai SH, Ashcroft J, D’Sa S, Littlewood T, Low E, Lucraft H, Maclean R,
Feyler S, Pratt G, Bird JM, on behalf of the Haemato-oncology Task Force of the
British Committee for Standards in Haematology and UK Myeloma Forum (2011)
Guidelines for supportive care in multiple myeloma 2011. British Journal of Haematology,
in press
Sonneveld, P., van der Holt, B., Schmidt-Wolf, I.G.H., Bertsch, U., el Jarari, L., Salwender, H.-J.,
Zweegman, S., Vellenga, E., Schubert, J., Blau, I.W., Jie, G., Beverloo, B., Jauch, A.,
Hose, D., Schaafsma, R., Kersten, M.J., Delforge, M., de Weerdt, O., van der Griend,
R., Wijermans, P.W., Martin, H., van der Velde, H., Lokhorst, H.M. & Goldschmidt, H.
(2008) First analysis of HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 randomized phase III trial comparing
bortezomib, adriamycine, dexamethasone (PAD) vs VAD as induction treatment prior
to high dose melphalan (HDM) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma
(MM). Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 112, Abstract 653.
Spencer, A., Prince, H.M., Roberts, A.W., Prosser, I.W., Bradstock, K.F., Coyle, L., Gill, D.S.,
Horvath, N., Reynolds, J. & Kennedy, N. (2009) Consolidation therapy with low-dose
thalidomide and prednisolone prolongs the survival of multiple myeloma patients
undergoing a single autologous stem-cell transplantation procedure. Journal of Clinical
Oncology, 27, 1788-1793.
Srkalovic, G., Cameron, M.G., Rybicki, L., Deitcher, S.R., Kattke-Marchant, K. & Hussein, M.A.
(2004) Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and multiple myeloma
are associated with an increased incidence of venothromboembolic disease. Cancer,
101, 558-666.
Stadtmauer, E.A., Weber, D.M., Niesvizky, R., Belch, A., Prince, M.H., San Miguel, J.F., Facon,
T., Olesnyckyj, M., Yu, Z., Zeldis, J.B., Knight, R.D. & Dimopoulos, M.A. (2009)
Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone at first relapse in comparison with
its use as later salvage therapy in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. European
Stewart, A.K., Vescio, R., Schiller, G., Ballester, O., Noga, S., Rugo, H., Freytes, C.,
Stadtmauer, E., Tarantolo, S., Sahebi, F., Stiff, P., Meharchard, J., Schlossman, R., Brown,
R., Tully, H., Benyunes, M., Jacobs, C., Berenson, R., White, M., DiPersio, J., Anderson,
K.C. & Berenson, J. (2001) Purging of autologous peripheral-blood stem cells using
CD34 selection does not improve overall or progression-free survival after high-dose
chemotherapy for multiple myeloma: results of a multicenter randomized controlled
trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19, 3771-3779.
Stewart, A.K., Chen, C.I., Howson-Jan, K., White, D., Roy, J., Kovacs, M.J., Shustik, C., Sadura,
A., Shepherd, L., Ding, K., Meyer, R.M. & Belch, A.R. (2004) Results of a multicenter
randomized phase II trial of thalidomide and prednisone maintenance therapy for
multiple myeloma after autologous stem cell transplant. Clinical Cancer Research, 10,
8170-8176.
Stewart, A.K., Bergsagel, P.L., Greipp, P.R., Dispenzieri, A., Gertz, M.A., Hayman, S.R., Kumar,
S., Lacy, M.Q., Lust, J.A., Russell, S.J., Witzig, T.E., Zeldenrust, S.R., Dingli, D., Reeder,
C.B., Roy, V., Kyle, R.A., Rajkumar, S.V. & Fonseca, R. (2007) A practical guide to
defining high-risk myeloma for clinical trials, patient counseling and choice of therapy.
Leukemia, 21, 529-534.
Terpos, E. & Dimopoulos, M.A. (2005) Myeloma bone disease: pathophysiology and
management. Annals of Oncology, 16, 1223-1231.
Terpos, E. & Rahemtulla, A. (2004) Bisphosphonate treatment for multiple myeloma. Drugs
Today (Barc), 40, 29-40.
Terpos, E., Sezer, O., Croucher, P.I., García-Sanz, R., Boccadoro, M., San Miguel, J., Ashcroft,
J., Bladé, J., Cavo, M., Delforge, M., Dimopoulos, M.A., Facon, T., Macro, M., Waage, A.
& Sonneveld, P. (2009) The use of bisphosphonates in multiple myeloma:
recommendations of an expert panel on behalf of the European Myeloma Network.
Annals of Oncology, 20, 1303-1317.
Tosi, P., Zamagni, E., Cellini, C., Cangini, D., Tacchetti, P., Tura, S., Baccarani, M. & Cavo, M.
(2004) Thalidomide alone or in combination with dexamethasone in patients with
advanced, relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and renal failure. European Journal
Tosi, P., Zamagni, E., Cellini, C., Plasmati, R., Cangini, D., Tacchetti, P., Perrone, G., Pastorelli,
F., Tura, S., Baccarani, M. & Cavo, M. (2005) Neurological toxicity of long-term (>1 yr)
thalidomide therapy in patients with multiple myeloma. European Journal of
van de Velde, H.J., Liu, X., Chen, G., Cakana, A., Deraedt, W. & Bayssas, M. (2007) Complete
response correlates with long-term survival and progression-free survival in high-dose
therapy in multiple myeloma. Haematologica, 92, 1399-1406.
Vela-Ojeda, J., Garcia-Ruiz-Esparza, M.A., Padilla-Gonzalez, Y., Gomez-Almaguer, D.,
Gutierrez-Aguirre, C.H., Gomez-Rangel, D., Morales-Toquero, A., Ruiz-Delgado, G.J.,
Delgado-Lamas, J.L. & Ruiz-Arguelles, G.J. (2007) Autologous peripheral blood stem
cell transplantation in multiple myeloma using oral versus I.V. melphalan. Annals of
Hematology, 86, 277-282.
Vigneau, C., Ardiet, C., Bret, M., Laville, M., Fiere, D., Tranchand, B. & Fouque, D. (2002)
Intermediate-dose (25mg/m2) IV melphalan for multiple myeloma with renal failure.
Journal of Nephrology, 15, 684-689.
Vogel, C.L., Yanagihara, R.H., Wood, A.J., Schnell, F.M., Henderson, C., Kaplan, B.H., Purdy,
M.H., Orlowski, R., Decker, J.L., Lacerna, L. & Hohneker, J.A. (2004) Safety and pain
palliation of zoledronic acid in patients with breast cancer, prostate cancer, or multiple
myeloma who previously received bisphosphonate therapy. Oncologist, 9, 687-695.

Waage, A., Gimsing, P., Juliusson, G., Turesson, I., Gulbrandsen, N., Eriksson, T., Hjorth, M.,
Nielsen, J.L., Lenhoff, S., Westin, J. & Wisloff, F. (2004) Early response predicts
thalidomide efficiency in patients with advanced multiple myeloma. British Journal of
Wang, M., Knight, R., Dimopoulos, M., Siegel, D., Rajkumar, S.V., Facon, T., Alexanian, R., Yu,
Z., Zeldis, J., Olesnyckyj, M. & Weber, D. (2006) Lenalidomide in combination with
dexamethasone was more effective than dexamethasone in patients who have
received prior thalidomide for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Blood (ASH
Annual Meeting Abstracts), 108, Abstract 3553.
Weber, D.M., Gavino, M., Delasalle, K., Rankin, K., Giralt, S., Alexanian, R. (1999)
Thalidomide alone or with dexamethasone for multiple myeloma. Blood, 94 (Suppl. I),
604a.
Weber, D., Wang, M., Chen, C., Belch, A., Stadtmauer, E.A., Niesvisky, R., Yu, Z., Olesnyckyj,
M., Zeldis, J., Knight, R.D. & Dimopoulos, M. (2006) Lenalidomide Plus High-Dose
Dexamethasone Provides Improved Overall Survival Compared to High-Dose
Dexamethasone Alone for Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM): Results of
2 Phase III Studies (MM-009, MM-010) and Subgroup Analysis of Patients with Impaired
Renal Function. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 108, 3547.
Weber, D.M., Chen, C., Niesvizky, R., Wang, M., Belch, A., Stadtmauer, E.A., Siegel, D.,
Borrello, I., Rajkumar, S.V., Chanan-Khan, A.A., Lonial, S., Yu, Z., Patin, J., Olesnyckyj,
M., Zeldis, J.B. & Knight, R.D. (2007) Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone for relapsed
multiple myeloma in North America. New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 2133-2142.
Wechalekar, A., Amato, D., Chen, C., Stewart K., A. & Reece, D. (2005) IgD multiple
myeloma--a clinical profile and outcome with chemotherapy and autologous stem cell
transplantation. Annals of Hematology, 84, 115-117.
Wijermans, P., Schaafsma, M., Norden, Y.v., Ammerlaan, R., Wittebol, S., Sinnige, H.,
Zweegman, S., Kooi, M.v.M., Griend, R.V.d., Lokhorst, H. & Sonneveld, P. (2008)
Melphalan/prednisone versus melphalan/prednisone/thalidomide in induction therapy
for multiple myeloma in elderly patients: final analysis of the dutch cooperative group
HOVON 49 study. Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), 112, Abstract 649.
Zervas, K., Mihou, D., Katodritou, E., Pouli, A., Mitsouli, C.H., Anagnostopoulos, A., Delibasi,
S., Kyrtsonis, M.C., Anagnostopoulos, N., Terpos, E., Zikos, P., Maniatis, A. &
Dimopoulos, M.A. (2007) VAD-doxil versus VAD-doxil plus thalidomide as initial
treatment for multiple myeloma: results of a multicenter randomized trial of the
Greek Myeloma Study Group. Annals of Oncology, 18, 1369-1375.
Zucchelli, P., Pasquali, S., Cagnoli, L. & Ferrari, G. (1988) Controlled plasma exchange trial in
acute renal failure due to multiple myeloma. Kidney International, 33, 1175-1180.

Table 1 - Initial investigations in patients with myeloma
Screening Tests to Tests to Tests to Special tests

tests establish estimate assess indicated in
diagnosis tumour myeloma- some
burden related organ patients
and prognosis impairment
(ROTI)
FBC, ESR or Bone marrow FISH analysis FBC

plasma viscosity aspirate +
trephine
biopsy with
plasma cell
phenotyping
Urea, creatinine, Immunofixatio Quantification Serum urea and SFLC assay
calcium, albumin n of creatinine in oligo-
of serum and Monoclonal secretory,
Electrophoresis urine protein in Creatinine light chain
of serum and serum and clearance only and non-
concentrated urine (measured or secretory
urine calculated) disease
Albumin
Quantification of B2- Calcium
non-isotypic microglobulin Albumin
immunoglobulins Plasma
viscosity
Tissue biopsy
(or fat pad
aspirate) for
amyloid (if
suspected)
Quantification of
non-isotypic
immunoglobulin
s
X-ray of Skeletal Skeletal survey Skeletal survey MRI
symptomatic survey CT scan
areas
FBC, full blood count; ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; FISH, Fluorescence in situ hybridization; SFLC,
serum-free light chain; MRI, Magnetic resonance imaging; CT, Computerized tomography.

Table 2- Diagnostic criteria for MGUS, asymptomatic myeloma and symptomatic
myeloma (adapted from International Myeloma Working Group, 2003)
MGUS Asymptomatic Symptomatic

myeloma myeloma
M-protein in serum <30 g/l M-protein in serum >30 g/l M-protein in serum
and/or and/or urine**
Bone marrow clonal plasma cells <10 % Bone marrow clonal plasma Bone marrow (clonal)
and low level of plasma cell infiltration in cells >10 % plasma cells* or biopsy
a trephine biopsy (if done) proven plasmacytoma
No related organ or tissue impairment No related organ or tissue Myeloma-related organ
((no end organ damage including bone impairment (no end organ or tissue impairment
lesions) damage including bone lesions) (including bone
or symptoms lesions)
*If flow cytometry is performed, most plasma cells (> 90%) will show a ‘neoplastic’ phenotype.
Some patients may have no symptoms but have related organ or tissue impairment.
** No specific concentration required for diagnosis. A small percentage of patients have no
detectable M-protein in serum or urine but do have myeloma-related organ impairment (ROTI) and
increased bone marrow plasma cells (non-secretory myeloma)

Table 3 - Myeloma-related organ or tissue impairment (ROTI) (adapted from
International Myeloma Working Group, 2003)
Clinical effects due Definition

to myeloma
*Increased calcium Corrected serum calcium >0.25 mmol/l above the upper limit of normal
levels or >2.75 mmol/l
*Renal insufficiency Creatinine>173 µmol/l
*Anaemia Haemoglobin 20 g/l below the lower limit of normal or haemoglobin <100
g/l
*Bone lesions Lytic lesions or osteoporosis with compression fractures
(MRI or CT may clarify)
Other Symptomatic hyperviscosity, amyloidosis, recurrent bacterial infections (>
2 episodes in 12 months)
*CRAB (calcium, renal insufficiency, anaemia or bone lesions).

MRI, Magnetic resonance imaging; CT, Computerized tomography.

Table 4 - International Staging System (ISS) for multiple myeloma. Adapted from: Greipp, P.R.et al:
Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 2005, 3412-3420. Reprinted with permission. © 2008
American Society of Clinical Oncology. All rights reserved
Stage Criteria Median survival in months

I Serum ß2 microglobulin < 3.5 mg/l (296 62 months
nmol/l) and serum albumin > 3.5 g/dl (35g/l
or 532 µmol/l)
II Neither I or III* 45 months
III Serum ß2 microglobulin > 5.5 mg/l (465 29 months
nmol/l)

Table 5 - International Myeloma Working Group uniform response criteria (Adapted
by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd: Leukemia: Durie, B.G., Harousseau, J.L.,
Miguel, J.S., Blade, J., Barlogie, B., Anderson, K., Gertz, M., Dimopoulos, M., Westin, J.,
Sonneveld, P., Ludwig, H., Gahrton, G., Beksac, M., Crowley, J., Belch, A., Boccadaro,
M., Cavo, M., Turesson, I., Joshua, D., Vesole, D., Kyle, R., Alexanian, R., Tricot, G.,
Attal, M., Merlini, G., Powles, R., Richardson, P., Shimizu, K., Tosi, P., Morgan, G. &
Rajkumar, S.V. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma.
Leukemia, 20, 1467-1473., copyright (2006) and Durie, B.G., Harousseau, J.L., Miguel,
J.S., Blade, J., Barlogie, B., Anderson, K., Gertz, M., Dimopoulos, M., Westin, J.,
Rajkumar, S.V. (2006) International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma.
Leukemia, 20, 1467-1473. copyright (2009). The latest available data (Rajkumar et al,
2011) are also included.
Response sub-category Response criteria
Stringent complete response (sCR) CR as defined below plus
• Normal SFLC ratio
• Absence of phenotypically aberrant plasma cells by
multiparameter flow cytometry
Complete response (CR)* • Negative immunofixation on the serum and urine
• Disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas
• <5% bone marrow plasma cells
Very good partial response (VGPR)* • Serum and urine M-protein detectable by
immunofixation but not on electrophoresis
OR
• >90% reduction in serum M-protein plus reduction
in 24-h urinary M-protein by > 90% or to <100
mg/24 h
Partial response (PR)* • >50% reduction of serum M-protein and reduction
in 24-h urinary M-protein by >90% or to <200
mg/24 h
Stable disease (SD) • Not meeting criteria for CR, VGPR, PR or
progressive disease

Table 6 - International Myeloma Working Group uniform response criteria: disease
progression and relapse ( Adapted by permission from Macmillan Publishers Ltd:
Leukemia: Durie, B.G., Harousseau, J.L., Miguel, J.S., Blade, J., Barlogie, B.,
Anderson, K., Gertz, M., Dimopoulos, M., Westin, J., Sonneveld, P., Ludwig, H.,
Gahrton, G., Beksac, M., Crowley, J., Belch, A., Boccadaro, M., Cavo, M.,
Turesson, I., Joshua, D., Vesole, D., Kyle, R., Alexanian, R., Tricot, G., Attal, M.,
Merlini, G., Powles, R., Richardson, P., Shimizu, K., Tosi, P., Morgan, G. &
Rajkumar, S.V. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma.
Leukemia, 20, 1467-1473., copyright (2006) and Durie, B.G., Harousseau, J.L., Miguel,
J.S., Blade, J., Barlogie, B., Anderson, K., Gertz, M., Dimopoulos, M., Westin, J.,
Rajkumar, S.V. (2006) International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma.
Leukemia, 20, 1467-1473. copyright (2009). The latest available data (Rajkumar et al,
2011) are also included.
Relapse subcategory Relapse criteria

Progressive disease (PD) Requires at least one of the following –
• >25% increase in serum M-protein in 3 months (absolute
increase must be >5g/l)
• >25% increase in urine M-protein in 3 months (absolute increase
must be >200 mg/24 h)
• >25% increase in the difference between involved and uninvolved
SFLC levels (applicable only to patients without measurable serum and
urine M- protein (absolute increase must be >100 mg/l)
• >25% increase in bone marrow plasma cell percentage (absolute
percentage must be >10%)
• Development of new bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytoma
• Development of hypercalcaemia
Clinical relapse Requires at least one of the following –
• Development of new bone lesions or soft tissue plasmacytoma
• Increase in size of existing plasmacytomas or bone lesions
• Any of the following attributable to myeloma:
-Development of hypercalcaemia
-Development of anaemia (drop in Hb >20 g/l)
-Rise in serum creatinine
Relapse from CR Requires at least one of the following –
• Reappearance of serum or urine M-protein by immunofixation or
electrophoresis
• Development of >5% plasma cells in the bone marrow
• Appearance of any other sign of progression (eg new
plasmacytoma, new lytic bone lesion)

Table 7: Comparison of side effects related to myeloma treatment with novel agents
Thalidomide Bortezomib Lenalidomide

Neutropenia No No Yes
Thrombocytopenia No Yes Yes
Neuropathy Yes Yes No
Constipation Yes Low risk Low risk
Diarrhoea No Yes No
Somnolence Yes No No
Fatigue Yes Yes Yes
Thrombotic risk Yes No Yes
Route of administration oral intravenous oral

Table 8: Important thalidomide toxicities
• Venous thromboembolism: highest risk is at diagnosis and when combined with
conventional chemotherapy and/or high dose dexamethasone. All patients require a
risk assessment to guide thromboprophylaxis (see section 7.3.2)
• Sensory peripheral neuropathy: this is common and usually cumulative. It may not
resolve for many months following discontinuation of thalidomide. A summary of key
recommendations from the supportive care guideline regarding treatment emergent
peripheral neuropathy is given in section 7.3.1. Directed questioning, close clinical
monitoring and prompt dose reductions if symptoms develop are needed ( see Table
11)
• Constipation: laxatives are often required pre-emptively
• Haematological toxicity is rare and dose reduction is rarely required
• Somnolence: evening dosing minimizes this and the effect reduces with use
• Rashes: these are varied and may respond to dose reduction. Rarely, Stevens-Johnson
syndrome.
• Arrhythmias: known cardiac arrhythmias are a relative contra-indication. Consider
cardiology review early in symptomatic patients
• Thyroid dysfunction: check baseline thyroid function at start of therapy and re-check
every 6 months. Patients on thyroxine supplements should have their thyroid
function monitored carefully as dosage may change on thalidomide therapy
• Congenital malformations due to foetal exposure: there have been no reported cases
of birth defects in myeloma patients on thalidomide. Risk management protocols to
minimize risks should be followed in all patients including strict contraceptive
precautions in both sexes

Table 9: Important bortezomib toxicities
• Peripheral neuropathy: predominantly sensory and painful, usually progressive and

variably reversible. The incidence, clinical features and risk factors for the
development of bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy (BIPN) are described in
detail in a review by Mohty et al (2010). A summary of key recommendations from
the supportive care guideline regarding treatment emergent peripheral neuropathy is
given in section 7.3.1. It is managed by early detection, dose-reduction (see Table 11)
and analgesia Gastrointestinal toxicity: constipation, diarrhoea, abdominal bloating or
pain. Patients should be warned of possible symptoms, Severe diarrhoea is relatively
rare but occasional patients with severe diarrhoea, unresponsive to loperamide may
require admission for hydration as these patients are at risk of developing pre-renal
acute renal failure
• Postural hypotension and pre-syncope secondary to autonomic neuropathy: pre-hydration with
saline infusion prior to each dose of bortezomib is a useful prophylactic measure. Screen for pre-
syncope and syncope and assess for a postural drop at the start of each treatment cycle. The
administration of 500 ml of normal saline prior to each dose of bortezomib may improve
tolerance of the drug.
• Many patients require dose adjustment of their usual anti-hypertensives for the
duration of bortezomib therapy
• Thrombocytopaenia: usually progressive over 21-day cycle with recovery prior to
next cycle. Check full blood count on days 1 and 8; consider dose reduction if platelets
<30 x 109/l on day 1 and transfuse platelets if <30 x 109/l on any other treatment day
• Fatigue

Table 10: Important lenalidomide toxicities
• Cytopenias: regular blood count monitoring is required (weekly for first 2 courses);
patients may need G-CSF
• Venous thromboembolism: thromboprophylaxis is recommended (see section 7.3.2
for recommendations)
• Constipation
• FatigueNeuropathy less frequent than with thalidomide or bortezomib. Lenalidomide
may be appropriate for patients with either disease or treatment-related neuropathy
but those with pre-existing neuropathy may develop worsening symptoms.
• Skin rash
• Muscle cramps
• Thyroid dysfunction
• Diarrhoea, particularly with long-term usage

Table 11 Guidelines for the management of bortezomib and thalidomide-induced PN
evaluated according to the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria
for Adverse Events. Reproduced from Mohty, B., El-Cheikh, J., Yakoub-Agha, I., Moreau,
P., Harousseau, J.L. & Mohty, M. (2010) Peripheral neuropathy and new treatments for
multiple myeloma: background and practical recommendations. Haematologica, 95, 311-
319. Obtained from Haematologica/the Hematology Journal website
http://www.haematologica.org
Grade of neuropathy Bortezomib Thalidomide

Grade 1 (paraesthesiae, No action No action
weakness and/or loss of
reflexes without pain or loss of
function)
Grade 1 with pain or Grade 2 Reduce bortezomib to 1.0 Reduce thalidomide dose to
(interfering with function but mg/m2 50% or suspend thalidomide
not with daily activities) until disappearance of toxicity,
then re-initiate at 50% dose
Grade 2 with pain or Grade 3 Suspend bortezomib until Suspend thalidomide until
(interfering with daily activities) disappearance of toxicity then disappearance of toxicity, then
re-initiate at 0.7 mg/m2 and re-initiate at low dose if PN
administer once weekly grade 1
Grade 4 (permanent sensory Discontinue bortezomib Discontinue thalidomide
loss interfering with function):

Table 12. The key features with regard to renal excretion and recommended dose adjustment in
renal impairment for drugs commonly used in the treatment of myeloma
Renally excreted Dose reduction in Special warnings

renal impairment
Melphalan yes yes Dose titration with bone
marrow toxicity
Cyclophosphamide yes yes
Doxorubicin no no
Dexamethasone no no
Thalidomide Unchanged thalidomide no The manufacturer recommends

was <3% of the dose in that patients with severe renal
urine but impairment should be carefully
pharmacologically monitored for adverse
active metabolites are reactions
excreted in the urine
Bortezomib no no
Lenalidomide yes yes

APPENDIX 1: Strength of recommendation and quality of evidence
Table I -
STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Strong (grade 1): Strong recommendations (grade 1) are made when there is confidence that the benefits do
or do not outweigh harm and burden. Grade 1 recommendations can be applied uniformly to most patients.
Regard as 'recommend'.
Weak (grade 2): Where the magnitude of benefit or not is less certain a weaker grade 2 recommendation is
made. Grade 2 recommendations require judicious application to individual patients. Regard as ‘suggest’.
Table 2
QUALITY OF EVIDENCE
The quality of evidence is graded as high (A), moderate (B) or low (C). To put this in context it is useful to
consider the uncertainty of knowledge and whether further research could change what we know or our
certainty.
(A) High Further research is very unlikely to change confidence in the estimate of effect. Current evidence
derived from randomised clinical trials without important limitations.
(B) Moderate Further research may well have an important impact on confidence in the estimate of effect
and may change the estimate. Current evidence derived from randomised clinical trials with important
limitations (e.g. inconsistent results, imprecision - wide confidence intervals or methodological flaws - e.g. lack of
blinding, large losses to follow up, failure to adhere to intention to treat analysis),or very strong evidence from
observational studies or case series (e.g. large or very large and consistent estimates of the magnitude of a
treatment effect or demonstration of a dose-response gradient).
(C) Low Further research is likely to have an important impact on confidence in the estimate of effect and is
likely to change the estimate. Current evidence from observational studies, case series or just opinion.
(http://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/index.htm).

APPENDIX 2: recommended dose reductions for various toxicities
Bisphosphonates and renal function
Adverse effects on renal function have been reported with the nitrogen-containing
bisphosphonates (pamidronate and zoledronic acid) and are most likely if the recommended
dose or rate of infusion is exceeded (Barri et al, 2004; Berenson et al, 1998; Chang et al, 2003;
Rosen et al, 2001). Although acute renal dysfunction may be reversible, renal impairment due
to acute tubular necrosis may result in chronic renal failure. Pamidronate has also been
associated with nephrotic syndrome due to a collapsing variant of focal segmental
glomerulosclerosis, which can lead to end-stage renal failure. Patients with pre-existing renal
impairment are thought to be particularly susceptible to bisphosphonate-induced renal
damage. It is essential to check the creatinine before each infusion of pamidronate and
zoledronic acid and withhold the next dose until the renal function has returned to within
10% of the baseline value.
The manufacturers' guidance on dose reduction in renal impairment is currently as follows:

Clodronate: half dose if creatinine clearance 10–30 ml/min; contraindicated if <10 ml/min.
Pamidronate: slower infusion rate (20 mg/h) if mild to moderate renal impairment; not
recommended if creatinine clearance <30 ml/min.
Zoledronic acid: Reduced dosing recommended in patients with creatinine clearance 30-60
ml/min; not recommended if serum creatinine >35 µmol/l.
Potentially this would mean that patients with severe renal failure including those on dialysis could not
be treated with a bisphosphonate.
However the SPC for Pamidronate states that ‘Pamidronate should not be administered to patients
with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min) unless in case of life-threatening
tumour induced hypercalcaemia where the benefit outweighs the potential risk’, although does not
make dose recommendations in this circumstance.
In addition there is wide clinical experience of using 30mg of pamidronate in patients with severe
renal impairment and appears safe if administered at a slower rate of 2-4 h. Its use should be in
consultation with a renal physician. (Grade C Evidence level IV)

The following table summarizes the recommended dose reductions of bisphosphonates in renal
impairment
Creatinine clearance Sodium Pamidronate Zoledronate

clodronate
30/35-60 ml /min No dose No dose modification. The No dose

modification infusion rate should not exceed modification
90mg over 4 h
10 -30 ml/min Half dose 30 mg to be given over 2-4 h Not

recommended
< 10 ml/min Contra 30 mg to be given over 2-4 h Not

indicated recommended
Lenalidomide and myelosuppression

Table A. Dose adjustment levels for lenalidomide
Starting daily dose 25mg

Daily dose level – 1 15mg
Table B. Dose adjustment for thrombocytopenia
When Platelets Action

First fall to <30 x109/l Pause lenalidomide treatment
Return to >30 x109/l Resume at dose level – 1
For each subsequent drop to <30 Pause lenalidomide treatment
x109/l Tabl
Return to >30 x109/l Resume at next lower dose level; do not dose below e C.
5mg daily. Dose
adjustment for neutropenia
When Neutrophils Action
First fall to < 0.5 x 109/l Interrupt lenalidomide treatment
Return to ≥ 0.5 x 109/l when neutropenia is the only Resume lenalidomide at starting dose once
observed toxicity daily

Return to ≥ 0.5 x 109/l when dose-dependent Resume lenalidomide at dose level –1 once
haematological toxicities other than neutropenia are daily
observed
For each subsequent drop below < 0.5 x 109/l Interrupt lenalidomide treatment
Return to ≥ 0.5 x 109/l Resume lenalidomide at next lower dose

level (Dose level 2 or 3) once daily. Do not
dose below 5 mg once daily.
Lenalidomide and renal impairment

Given the increased incidence of grades 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia in patients with impaired renal
function, careful platelet monitoring is highly recommended in patients with an elevated serum
creatinine, and attention is drawn to the importance of dose adjustment due to renal impairment
(Table D). There are currently no recommendations for dose adjustments in patients with hepatic
insufficiency.
Table D. Suggested dose reductions for renal insufficiency

Renal Function (creatinine clearance) Dose Adjustment
Mild renal impairment 25 mg once daily

(creatinine clearance ≥ 50 ml/min) (full dose)
Moderate renal impairment 10 mg once daily
(30 ≤ creatinine clearance < 50 ml/min)
Severe renal impairment 15 mg every other day
(creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min, not requiring
dialysis)
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) 5 mg once daily (following
(creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min, requiring dialysis) dialysis on dialysis days)

APPENDIX 3 : Evidence summaries
Table 1: Results of trials comparing thalidomide-based induction with conventional

chemotherapy
Treatment Response rate >PR CR (%) Reference

regimens (n) (%)
TD (103) vs dex (104) 63 vs 41 (p=0.0017) 4 vs 0 Rajkumar et al, 2006
TD (235) vs dex (235) 63 vs 46 (P <0.001) 7.7 vs 2.6 Rajkumar et al, 2008
p=0.02
TAD vs VAD (402)* 72% vs. 54% (p<0.001) 7 vs 3 Lokhorst et al, 2010
TD vs VAD (204)* NA 24.7 vs 7.3# Macro et al, 2006
(p=0.0027)
T-VAD- doxil (117) vs 81.2 vs 62.6 (p=0.003) 15.4 vs 12.2 (Zervas et al, 2007)
VAD-doxil (115)
CTD vs C-VAD 87.1 vs 74.8 19.4 vs 9.4 Morgan et al, 2009
(1114)*
those where induction therapy was followed by planned SCT are marked *.
# only VGPR reported
TD, thalidomide plus dexamethasone (dex); TAD, thalidomide, doxorubicin,
dexamethasone; VAD, vincristine, doxorubicin, dexamethasone; T-VAD, VAD plus
thalidomide; C-VAD, VAD plus cyclophosphamide; CTD, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide
and dexamethasone.
Table 2: Results of phase II/III studies of bortezomib /dexamethasone induction therapy
n RR (%) CR (%) Number References

proceeding
to SCT
Bortezomib/ 32 88 6 8 Jagannath et
bortezomib-dex (added al, 2005b
if <PR after 2 cycles)
Bortezomib and 52 66 21 42 (88%) Harousseau
dexamethasone et al, 2006
Bortezomib alternating 40 65 12.5 37 Rosiñol et

with dexamethasone al, 2007
PAD 21 95 24 18 (18/21) Oakervee et
al, 2005
Bortezomib- Doxil-dex 30 89 32** 17/30 Jakubowiak
et al, 2006
VCD 300 84 10 NA Einsele et al,
2009
CyBORD 33 88 39** 23/33 Reeder et al,
2009
Bortezomib and 482 78.5 vs 5.8% vs Harousseau
dexamethasone vs VAD 62.8 1.4% et al, in
(p=0.0003) (p=0.012) press
PAD vs VAD 300 85 vs 59 5 vs 1 NA Sonneveld

et al, 2008
TD vs VTD vs 290 64 vs 82 vs 14 vs 29 177 Rosiñol et
VMCP/VBAP/bortezomib 75 vs 25 al, 2009
** only CR/nCR reported

dex, dexamethasone; PAD, ; VCD, bortezomib (Velcade) cyclophosphamide and
dexamethasone; CyBORD, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, dexamethasone; VAD, vincristine,
doxorubicin, dexamethasone; TD, thalidomide plus dexamethasone; TAD, thalidomide,
doxorubicin, dexamethasone; VMCP, vincristine, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, prednisone;
VBAP, vincristine, carmustine, doxorubicin, prednisone.
Table 3: Results of phase II studies of lenalidomide and dexamethasone +/- as induction

therapy
Patients Response rate CR Reference
(%) rate
(%)
Lenalidomide/ 34 91 6 Rajkumar et al,
dexamethasone 2005
Clarithromycin 72 90.3 38.9 Niesvizky et al,
(Biaxin), lenalidomide 2008
and dexamethasone
(BiRD)
Lenalidomide/ 53 83 2 Kumar et al,
cyclophosphamide/ 2008c
dexamethasone
Lenalidomide and 445 76 * 16* Rajkumar et al,
high dose vs low 2010
dose dexamethasone
* after 4 cycles of treatment (90 of these patients proceeded to stem cell transplant)
Table 4: Results of trials investigating combinations involving 2 or more novel agents as

induction therapy prior to SCT
RR CR Type of trial reference

TD vs VTD vs 290 64 vs 82 vs 14 vs 29 Phase III Rosiñol et
VBMCP/VBAP 75 vs 25 al, 2009
alternating
with Velcade
VTD vs TD 474 92 vs 78.5% 19 vs 5% Phase III Cavo et al,
P<0.001 P<0.001 2009
RVD 66 98 36 CR + phase I/II Richardson
nCR et al, 2009
VDCR 33 94 15 Randomized Kumar et al,
phase I/II 2009b
TD, thalidomide plus dexamethasone; VTD, bortezomib (Velcade) thalidomide and

dexamethasone; VBMCP, vincristine, BCNU (carmustine) melphalan, cyclophosphamide,
prednisone; VBAP, vincristine, carmustine, doxorubicin, prednisone; RVD, lenalidomide, bortezomib,
dexamethasone; VDCR, cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, dexamethasone, lenalidomide.
Table 5: Summary of randomized trials comparing MPT with MP as induction therapy

in elderly patients
Study Regimen n CR (%) >PR(%) Median Median

PFS OS
(months) (months)
IFM 99-06 MPT vs 125 13 76 27.5 51.6
(Facon et al, MP vs 196 2 35 17.8 33.2

2007) MEL100* 126 18 65 19.4 38.3
IFM 01-01 MPT vs 113 7 61 24.1 45.3
(Hulin MP 116 1 31 19 27.7
20097)
(Gulbrandsen MPT vs 357 6 42 16 29
et al, 2008) MP evaluable 3** 28 14 33
HOVON 49 MPT vs 165 2 66 13 37
study MP 168 2 47 9 30
(Wijermans
et al, 2008)
GIMEMA MPT vs 129 15.5 76 21.8 45.0
(Palumbo et MP 126 2 48 14.5 47.6
al, 2006),
updated in
(Palumbo et
al, 2008a)
* This study involved a 3-way randomization, including an arm consisting of standard induction
followed by intermediate dose melphalan and stem cell rescue.
** CR/nCR only reported
(n)CR, (near) complete response; PR, partial response; MPT, melphalan, prednisolone, thalidomide;
MP, melphalan, prednisolone; MEL100, melphalan 100 mg/m2.
Table 6: Summary of randomized controlled trials comparing conventional

chemotherapy with high dose therapy and ASCT
Trial n EFS (median, OS (median, Reference

months) months)
IFM90
Conventional 100 8% @ 7 years 25% @ 7 years Attal et al, 1996;
SCT 100 16% @7 years 43% @ 7 years Harousseau et al, 2005
MRC
Myeloma VII
Conventional 200 32 20 Child et al, 2003
SCT 201 54 months 42
MAG91

Conventional 91 13 64 Fermand et al, 1998
SCT 94 39 65
PETHEMA
Conventional 83 34 67 Blade et al, 2001
SCT 81 43 67
EFS, event-free survival; OS, overall survival; SCT stem cell transplantation.
Table 7: Results of prospective, ‘biologically randomized’ studies of tandem

autografting compared to ASCT/ RIC Allo (adapted from San-Miguel, J.F.
& Mateos, M.V. (2009) How to treat a newly diagnosed young patient with
multiple myeloma. Hematology 2009: American Society of Hematology
Education Program Program Book, 555-65., with permission. © the
American Society of Hematology)
Cooperative group Patients CR (%) EFS OS P value

(n) (months) (months)
IFM (Garban et al, 166 vs 46 37 vs 55 25 vs 21 57 vs 41 NS
2006)*
GIMEMA (Bruno et al, 82 vs 80 26 vs 55 33 vs 37 64 vs NYR S (both)
2007)
PETHEMA (Rosiñol et 82 vs 25 11 vs 40 20 vs 26 58 vs 60 NS
al, 2008)**
HOVON (Lokhorst et 101 vs 42 vs 45 34 vs 39 63 vs 56 NS
al, 2008)# 115
EBMT (Bjorkstrand et 250 vs 41 vs 52 15 vs 36 50 vs 65
al, 2009) 110
*patients with poor-risk disease as defined by the presence of deletion 13q by FISH along with
elevated B2-microglobulin (> 3 mg/L)
**patients failing to achieve at least near complete remission (nCR) after first ASCT
# patients underwent biological randomization to receive either RIC-allo after first ASCT or
maintenance therapy
S = significant p value
NS = non-significant p value
IFM, Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome; GIMEMA, Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche

dell‘Adulto; PETHEMA, Programa para el Estudio y Tratamiento de las Hemopatias Maligna; HOVON,
Stichting Hemato-Oncologie voor Volwassenen Nederland; EBMT, European Group for Blood and
Marrow Transplantation.

Table 8: Summary of selected reported series of Allo-SCT in MM.
FI AlloSCT
Conditioning Regimen n CR % TRM % EFS (%) OS (%) Ref
Cyclophosphamide/TBI 39 47.2 31.5 13.3 (5 years) 28.1 (5 years) Hunter et al, 2005
Melphalan/TBI 78 54.7 35.3 36.2 (5 years) 44.1 (5 years) Hunter et al, 2005
Bu/Cyclo/TBI 15 53.3 17 31 (6 years) 77 (6 years) Kroger et al, 2003
Cyclo/TBI (+/-Idarubicin) 53 19 34 median 18 months median 25 months Lokhorst et al, 2003
Cyclo/TBI 53 22 (7 years) 39 (7 years) Barlogie et al, 2006a
Mel/TBI 72 38 22 31.4 (10 years) 39.9 (10 years) Kuruvilla et al, 2007
RIC AlloSCT
Conditioning Regimen n CR TRM EFS (%) OS (%) Ref
Flu/Bu/ATG 41 24 17 41 (2 years) 62 (2 years) Mohty et al, 2004
Flu/TBI200Gy 52 27 17 29.4 (1.5 years) 41 (1.5 years) Gerull et al, 2005
ASCT→Flu/TBI200Gy 16 62 16 36 (3 years) 62 (3 years) Bruno et al, 2007
ASCT→Flu/Bu 46 33 11 - 57 (2 years) Garhton et al, 2001
ASCT→Flu/Mel/ATG 17 73 18 56 (2 years) 74 (2 years) Kroger et al, 2002
ASCT→TBI200Gy 54 57 7 45 (4 years) 69 (4 years) Maloney et al, 2003
ASCT→ Flu/Bu/ATG 65 62.2 10.9 median 32 months median 35 months Garban et al, 2006
ASCT→Flu/Mel/TBI200Gy 45 64 36 13 (3 years) 36 (3 years) Lee et al, 2003b
[Non-relapse/Ref] 12 - - 80 (3 years) 80 (3 years)
Key: FI – full intensity/myeloablative conditioning, RIC – reduced intensity conditioning, TRM –

treatment-related mortality, ASCT→: Planned tandem autologous stem cell transplantation followed
by an allogeneic stem cell transplantation; Flu: Fludarabine; TBI200Gy: single fraction total body
irradiation; Bu: intravenous busulphan; Cyclo, cyclophosphamide; ATG: anti-thymocyte globulin; Mel:
high dose Melphalan
Table 9: Results of randomized prospective studies investigating thalidomide as

potential maintenance therapy post autologous transplantation
Study/Reference Patient PFS OS Duration and dose

Numbers
IFM 99-02 (Attal et al, 597 3-year 52% 4-year 87% Median 15 months, 200
2006) versus 37% versus 77% mg per day
(p=0.002) (P=0.04)
Total Therapy 668 5-year 56% No benefit Until relapse or
(Barlogie et al, 2006b) versus 41% toxicity, 400 mg per
(p=0.01) day
Thalidomide and 269 3-year 42% 86% versus 12 months, 200 mg per
versus 23%
prednisolone (Spencer 75% day
(p<0.001)
et al, 2009) (p=0.004)

APPENDIX 4 : Suggested proforma for the early detection of bortezomib-associated
toxicities.
BORTEZOMIB NURSING ASSESSMENT

NAME: HOSPITAL NUMBER: WT:
DATE:
CYCLE: Hb: PLTS: NEUTS:
DAY/WEEK:
Temp Pulse BP RR Sats AVPU
NEUROPATHY SCORE
0 1 2 3 4
Mild tingling not Numbness, cramps, Numbness, burning or Severe pain and
interfering with function burning sensation or pain, Interfering with permanent loss of
None
stabbing pain. Not ADL function
interfering with activities
of daily living (ADL)
INFORM DR INFORM DR INFORM DR INFORM DR
ABDOMINAL PAIN
Life threatening
Mild pain not interfering Moderate pain; pain or Severe pain; pain or
None analgesics interfering analgesics severely consequences
with function
with function but not interfering with ADL
with ADL
INFORM DR INFORM DR INFORM DR
NAUSEA/VOMITING
None 2-5 episodes in 24 hours >5 episodes in 24 hrs
may require IV Fluids requiring IV Fluids Life threatening
1 episode in 24 hours consequences
INFORM DR INFORM DR INFORM DR
DIARRHOEA
None 1-3 episodes in 24 4-6 episodes in 24 hours >6 episodes in 24 hours:

hours, advise to increase may require IV fluids: requiring IV fluids: Life threatening
fluid intake not interfering with ADL interfering with ADL consequences
INFORM DR INFORM DR INFORM DR INFORM DR
CONSTIPATION
Life threatening
None Occasional or Persistent symptoms Symptoms interfering consequences
intermittent symptoms; with regular use of with ADL; enema
occasional use of laxatives required
laxatives INFORM DR INFORM DR
INFORM DR
FATIGUE
Mild fatigue, Over Severe fatigue,
None Moderate or causing
baseline/ little tired interfering with ALL
difficulty to ADL Debilitating
ADL’s
INFORM DR
INFORM DR INFORM DR
AUTONOMIC NEUROPATHY
Occasional dizziness on Regular dizziness on
None standing standing with no > 1 syncopal episode
(<x3 per week) Postural drop >20mmHg
postural drop (>3 x per (fainting) associated with
+/- regular Dizziness
week) fall in BP
INFORM DR INFORM DR
INFORM DR INFORM DR
DAY 1 ONLY Lying BP Standing BP
CANNULA GAUGE: VEIN USED: BY:

DOSE REDUCED DATE: NEUROPATHY QUESTIONNAIRE D1 & 8:

OTHER SIDE-EFFECTS/EVALUATION:
NAME……………………………………………..
SIGNATURE:……………………………………………………...


Mieloma Guidelines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mieloma Guidelines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mieloma Guidelines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GUIDELINES FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND MANAGEMENT OF MULTIPLE MYELOMA 2013

Tel: 0117 342 4394

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 1 of 99

Key Words: myeloma, myeloma therapy, lymphoid malignancies, malignant haematology,

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 2 of 99

1. Methodology, epidemiology and clinical presentation

The production of these guidelines involved the following steps:

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 3 of 99

1.2 Incidence, prevalence and epidemiology

The annual incidence of myeloma in the UK is approximately 60-70 per million

1.3 Clinical Presentation

Presenting clinical features include symptoms of:

2. Diagnosis, prognostic factors and disease monitoring

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 5 of 99

Recommendations (all Grade A1)

• IMWG diagnostic criteria should be used

2.3 Monitoring and indications for starting therapy

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 6 of 99

2.4 Prognostic factors and staging in symptomatic myeloma

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 7 of 99

Recommendations (all Grade C1)

2.5 Measuring Response to Therapy

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 8 of 99

Definitions of measurable disease

Recommendations (all Grade B1)

2.6 Rare myelomas

Plasma Cell Leukaemia

IgD, E and M Myelomas

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 10 of 99

Significant advances in available imaging technologies have paralleled developments in

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 11 of 99

Up to 30% of myeloma patients present with hypercalcaemia occurring mostly in the

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 12 of 99

All patients with moderate to severe hypercalcaemia should receive a bisphosphonate.

Recommendations (mostly grade C; level III evidence)

• in moderate-severe hypercalcaemia (corrected calcium >2.9 mmol/l) re-hydrate with

• zoledronic acid is the bisphosphonate of choice in the treatment of hypercalcaemia (Grade

4.3 Cord compression

• Surgery is recommended for emergency decompression in the setting of bony compression

• If cord compression is a presenting symptom, it is important to concurrently pursue a rapid

4.4 Early Infection

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 14 of 99

5 Myeloma bone disease

5.1 Clinical features of bone disease

5.2 Bone fractures

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 15 of 99

Treatment in asymptomatic patients

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 16 of 99

Recommendations for bisphosphonate therapy

• Bisphosphonate therapy is recommended for all patients with symptomatic multiple

• There is no consensus regarding the duration of bisphosphonate therapy. The standard of

• At present there is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for the use of

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 17 of 99

Renal impairment is a common and potentially serious complication of myeloma occurring at

6.2 Prevention of Renal Failure

6.3 Early Management of Renal Failure

Recommendations for initial management of renal failure

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 19 of 99

2013 update of 2010 Guideline Page 20 of 99