101
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Assessment and monitoring of patients receiving chemotherapy for multiple myeloma: strategies to improve outcomes

&
Pages 21-35 | Published online: 24 May 2016

Abstract

Improved understanding as to the biology of multiple myeloma (MM) and the bone marrow microenvironment has led to the development of new drugs to treat MM. This explosion of new and highly effective drugs has led to dramatic advances in the management of MM and underscores the need for supportive care. Impressive and deep response rates to chemotherapy, monoclonal antibodies, and small molecule drugs provide hope of a cure or prolonged remission for the majority of individuals. For most patients, long-term, continuous therapy is often required to suppress the malignant plasma cell clone, thus requiring clinicians to become more astute in assessment, monitoring, and intervention of side effects as well as monitoring response to therapy. Appropriate diagnosis and monitoring strategies are essential to ensure that patients receive the appropriate chemotherapy and supportive therapy at relapse, and that side effects are appropriately managed to allow for continued therapy and adherence to the regimen. Multiple drugs with complex regimens are currently available with varying side effect profiles. Knowledge of the drugs used to treat MM and the common adverse events will allow for preventative strategies to mitigate adverse events and prompt intervention. The purpose of this paper is to review updates in the diagnosis and management of MM, and to provide strategies for assessment and monitoring of patients receiving chemotherapy for MM.

Introduction

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable, but highly treatable cancer characterized by an overproliferation of bone marrow plasma cells, which leads to the production of a monoclonal protein. Through a series of genetic changes, genetic mutations, and cellular alterations, the normal plasma cell turns malignant. Cancerous plasma cells overproduce clonal immunoglobulin (Ig) proteins which cause organ destruction. Although the genetic makeup of the tumor itself and patient symptoms at presentation are heterogeneous, common signs and symptoms of MM exist at diagnosis. Known as “CRAB” criteria, the pneumonic stands for hyperCalcemia, Renal insufficiency, Anemia, and Bone damage. The incidence of these at diagnosis is as follows: anemia 73%, bone pain 68%, renal insufficiency 19%, and hypercalcemia 13%.Citation1 To delay worsening of existing organ damage, or to prevent future organ damage, prompt treatment of the malignant plasma cells with chemotherapy is warranted.

As of 2012, it is estimated that 65,000 individuals are living with MM globally and comprise ∼2% of all cancer types.Citation2 The incidence of MM is expected to increase over the next decade. The etiology of MM is unknown, but the risk is associated with increasing age, obesity, and race. MM is more prevalent in individuals over the age of 65 and is nearly two times higher in African–American individuals and men. Obesity and high body mass index further increases the risk to develop monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and potential MM.Citation3

Initial evaluation

All patients who present with an abnormal paraprotein should undergo a thorough laboratory, radiologic, and physical assessment, as multiple factors are considered to make the correct diagnosis. In addition to usual tests such as a complete blood count with differential count and complete metabolic panel testing, common biomarkers to assess MM disease include serum protein electrophoresis with quantification of monoclonal protein, urine protein electrophoresis, and kappa/lambda serum free light chain (FLC). Beta-2 microglobulin and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) also assess the burden of disease.Citation4

Genetic changes and aberrations to the plasma cell clone and within the bone marrow microenvironment can lead to myeloma cell development and breed resistant disease over time. Three main ways to identify genetic aberrations in MM patients on clonal plasma cells include: 1) karyotype chromosome analysis, 2) fluorescence in situ hybridization, and 3) gene expression profiling.Citation5,Citation6 Traditional MM-specific tests (such as serum protein electrophoresis, urine protein electrophoresis, kappa/lambda FLCs, and LDH) are combined with these methods to estimate prognosis. Clinicians should have knowledge of biomarker and genomic results which are essential when stratifying patients into appropriate risk categories, as the results guide treatment selection.Citation7Citation10

In addition to laboratory testing and bone marrow evaluation with biopsy, radiologic testing at diagnosis is important to determine if bone disease is present. Back or bone pain is a common presenting symptom of MM, as destructive, painful osteolytic lesions are common at diagnosis. Pain can be a result of increased osteoclastic activity, skeletal fractures, bone marrow plasmacytosis, or can be due to a plasmacytoma.Citation11 Not all lesions are painful; however, assessment of MM bone disease is critical to delineate one’s diagnosis and should continue periodically with disease monitoring. At baseline, conventional plain radiography with a metastatic skeletal survey should be performed and include the axial skeleton, skull, and large cortical bones. An abnormal survey will reveal osteolytic lesions, osteopenia, or fractures in ∼80% of patients with MM at diagnosis. However, ∼30% bone loss should have occurred before bone lesions are detected.Citation12Citation14 For patients with a high suspicion of extramedullary disease or occult bone disease not seen on conventional radiology, 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography– computed tomography, positron emission tomography– magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or MRI of spine or suspicious lesions should be considered.Citation15

Diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM

The diagnosis of MM continues to evolve as new drugs that effectively treat MM are available. In previous years, the diagnosis of MM was made if patients had experienced a myeloma-defining event, or “CRAB” criteria were achieved. MM occurs along a spectrum of plasma cell disorders that range from an asymptomatic and often benign condition called MGUS, smoldering MM (SMM), and symptomatic MM. It is currently recommended that patients with MGUS or SMM be only treated within the context of a well-designed clinical trial. Currently, only symptomatic MM requires immediate treatment (). Thus, it is essential that an accurate diagnosis of MM be confirmed prior to initiating plasma cell directed therapy.Citation4,Citation16

Table 1 Diagnostic criteria for multiple myeloma and differential diagnosis

MGUS is present in ∼3%–4% of the US population in individuals over the age of 50 years and often precedes the diagnosis of MM and other plasma cell disorders.Citation1,Citation17 Patients qualify for an MGUS diagnosis if they lack CRAB criteria and have no evidence of organ damage related to the monoclonal protein.Citation9 There are three types of paraproteinemia: IgG, IgA, and IgM. Individuals with non-IgM MGUS carry a relatively low risk of progression to MM, lymphoma, amyloidosis, or other plasma cell dyscrasias at a rate of <1% per year. One’s individual risk of progression, however, is based on the level of monoclonal protein concentration in the blood or urine, serum FLC burden, and percentage of bone marrow plasmacytosis.Citation16,Citation18Citation20 Patients with SMM have a higher burden of disease, but remain without CRAB criteria or evidence of organ damage. While some patients with SMM behave more like MGUS, meaning a low risk of progression and quiescent disease course, a majority of patients will progress within 2 years if bone marrow plasma cells are >10% and there is elevated serum FLC ratio, and t (4:14), gain 1q, or other genetic abnormalities are present.Citation21,Citation22 It is important to consider that ∼7% of newly diagnosed MGUS or MM patients will have a concurrent diagnosis of amyloidosis. Close attention to renal, cardiac, or other abnormalities should alert the clinician to assess for the presence of amyloid, which would require emergent treatment.

In 2014, the International Myeloma Working Group revised the criteria for diagnosis of MM to include clonal bone marrow plasma cell percentage ≥60%, an involved to uninvolved serum FLC ratio ≥100, and >1 focal lesions on MRI.Citation4,Citation14,Citation16 The update was based on prior studies which supported an increased risk of progression to MM based on these three aforementioned factors. The presence of greater than one lesion on MRI was associated with a median time to progression of 13 months, and 70% of individuals had progressed at 2 years. In a study of patients with SMM, those with clonal bone marrow plasma cell percentage of 60% or greater had all progressed to symptomatic MM within 2 years.Citation23 Elevated serum FLC ratios >100 and involved FLC >100 mg/L have been linked to an increased risk of MM disease progression in as less as 18 months.Citation24Citation26 The recommendation to include the presence of more than one focal lesion was based on a study which evaluated the use of whole-body MRI in MM. The presence of a single lesion on MRI was associated with a median time to progression of 13 months, and 70% of individuals in the study progressed at 2 years.Citation27

Prognosis and risk stratification is based on the revised international staging system (ISS), Durie–Salmon staging system, and genetic classification with chromosomal abnormalities.Citation5,Citation28Citation32 Host factors and genetic factors are two criteria which influence prognosis. Host factors affect prognosis and include increased age and comorbid illnesses. Genetic factors include IgH translocations and high LDH levels. A majority of patients will have trisomy or hyperdiploid MM with t (11; 14) or t (6; 14), which confers a favorable prognosis. Approximately 10% will have intermediate-risk disease with fluorescent in situ hybridization t (4; 14). The remainder of patients are categorized as high risk with t (14; 16), t (14; 20), 17p deletion, or a high-risk gene expression profiling signature.Citation5,Citation9

Treatment of MM

Just as the diagnosis of MM continues to evolve, so do its treatment goals. While a cure may be possible for a small percentage of patients, usually those with standard- or low-risk disease, the primary goal of treatment is disease control and improvement of symptoms. Prompt initiation of chemotherapy to prevent worsening of symptoms or organ damage is recommended. Despite the availability of methods to assess the risk status and disease burden, there is no clear consensus as to the best treatment for newly diagnosed MM patients, but it is clear that the newer drugs are superior to older drugs and should be included in treatment.

With four new drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015, there are now seven therapeutic classes of drugs approved for use in the US to treat myeloma. Examples include: 1) alkylating agents (melphalan, cyclophosphamide); 2) other chemotherapy (doxorubicin, vincristine, etoposide); 3) corticosteroids (dexamethasone, prednisone); 4) histone deacetylase inhibitors (panobinostat); 5) immunomodulatory agents (lenalidomide, pomalidomide, thalidomide); 6) monoclonal antibodies (daratumumab and elotuzumab [ELO]); and 7) proteasome inhibitors (borte zomib, carfilzomib, and ixazomib).Citation33 The survival of patients with MM has increased over the past decade as new classes of drugs with novel mechanisms of action have been added to the treatment armamentarium, although it remains unclear which drug or drug combination should be given sequentially.Citation34 Most will agree that combination therapies, given at diagnosis or relapse, have provided improved response rates and progression-free survival (PFS), compared to standard chemotherapy alone.Citation35Citation46 Current guidelines suggest every patient with MM should be evaluated for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation at the time of diagnosis. Regardless of transplant eligibility, prolonged doses of melphalan should be avoided in transplant-eligible patients as melphalan can impair the ability to collect stem cells. For most, combination therapy with two drugs or three drugs upfront remains common practice. highlights the common side effects of treatment categorized by body system and general recommendations, as the clinicians have to be aware of them for health promotion.

Table 2 Common adverse events and survivorship considerations in patients with MM

Bortezomib

Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor that has been extensively studied and shown to improve PFS and overall survival (OS) in several studies on newly diagnosed or relapsed MM.Citation35,Citation38,Citation39 In a trial of 682 patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) and ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant, each of them was randomly assigned to receive nine 6-week cycles of melphalan (9 mg/m2) and prednisone (60 mg/m2) on days 1–4. Melphalan and prednisone (MP) was given to patients either alone or in combination with bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) on days 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, and 32 for four cycles. This was followed by a maintenance phase for responding patients (cycles 5–9). The combination of bortezomib + MP was superior to MP alone, as 71% of patients had achieved at least a partial response versus 35% of patients receiving MP alone.Citation39 Side effects of peripheral neuropathy and diarrhea were greater in the bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) versus MP groups, thus close attention to peripheral neuropathy symptoms and diarrhea is warranted.

Bortezomib has been studied in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed and relapsed MM.Citation47Citation49 Recent results of a large cooperative group study showed a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in PFS among groups. In this Phase III, multi center Southwest Oncology Group study, bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) was compared to standard therapy with lenalidomide and dexa methasone (Rd). The primary end point was PFS. Of 474 patients evaluable for response, median PFS was 43 months (VRd) versus 31 months (Rd). Median OS was not reached in the VRd group versus 63 months in the Rd group. The most common hematologic adverse events (AEs) were low hemoglobin (VRd = 13% vs Rd = 16%), leukopenia (VRd = 14% vs Rd = 16%), lymphopenia (VRd = 23% vs Rd = 18%), neutropenia (VRd = 19% vs Rd = 21%), and low platelets (VRd = 18% vs Rd = 14%). Side effects such as hypokalemia, muscle weakness, diarrhea, and dehydration were more common in the VRd versus Rd groups, although the incidence of thromboembolic events was similar (VRd = 8% vs Rd = 9%). Sensory neuro pathy was more common in the VRd versus Rd groups (23% vs 3%), with greater severity in the VRd versus Rd groups (24% vs 5%). It is important to note, however, that administering bortezomib by the subcutaneous (SC) route will minimize the incidence and severity of peripheral neuropathy.Citation50,Citation51 The impressive PFS data in this Southwest Oncology Group study support the use of a three-drug combination upfront; however, the improved survival is counterbalanced by increased risk of neurotoxicity. Thus, for individuals who receive this regimen, zoster prophylaxis, neuropathy surveillance, SC bortezomib administration, dose adjustments, and education are essential to minimize the risk of AEs. Appropriate laboratory and disease monitoring is also recommended.Citation9

Lenalidomide

Lenalidomide and dexamethasone have proved to be superior to dexamethasone alone in randomized clinical trials in patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed MM, and can be given to patients who are transplant eligible and ineligible.Citation52Citation54 In the Frontline Investigation of Revlimid (lenalidomide) and dexamethasone versus Standard Thalidomide study, 1,623 NDMM patients were randomized to one of three treatment arms. These included: 1) standard Rd in 28-day cycles until disease progression (n=535), 2) Rd for 72 weeks (18 cycles; n=541; Rd18), and 3) melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) for 72 weeks (n=547). The median PFS was 25.5 months in the continuous Rd arm, 20.7 months in the Rd18 arm, and 21.2 months in the MPT arm. The 4-year OS rate in the Rd continuous group was 59% compared to 51% among patients who received MPT.Citation45 The incidence of grade 3 side effects was lower in the continuous Rd group versus MPT group (85% vs 89%), primarily because of the higher incidence of neuropathy in the MPT versus Rd groups (9% vs 1% respectively).

The Rd combination is generally well tolerated and effective in transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients. The most common starting dose for patients with a creatinine clearance >60 mL/min/1.73m2 is 25 mg orally on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle in combination with dexamethasone 40 mg orally weekly. However, the dose of lenalidomide and dexamethasone should be carefully considered. Recent studies suggest that patients do better with reduced doses of lenalidomide and dexamethasone, which is especially found in patients of older age (>75) or in those with decreased renal function.Citation55Citation58

Carfilzomib

Carfilzomib, an epoxyketone proteasome inhibitor, differs from bortezomib in that it binds selectively and irreversibly to the proteasome.Citation44 Carfilzomib has demonstrated activity as a single agent and in combination with other drugs. The combination of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone is approved by the FDA, in combination with Rd, based on the results of a large, Phase III study called the ASPIRE trial. In this trial, 792 patients with relapsed MM were randomized to receive intravenous (IV) carfilzomib + Rd (KRd) or Rd.Citation44 A higher overall response rate (ORR) was observed in the KRd versus Rd groups (87.1% vs 66.7%), and was accompanied by a 31% decrease in the risk of progressive disease (PD) or death. The most common side effect in both groups was myelosuppression. The study supports the use of a three-drug regimen (proteasome inhibitor, immunomodulatory drug, and corticosteroid) to treat relapsed and refractory MM.Citation44

In patients with relapsed and refractory MM, carfilzomib is effective when administered IV in doses from 27 to 56 mg/m2 IV twice weekly.Citation59Citation64 In the Phase III ENDEAVOR trial, 929 patients were randomized to receive carfilzomib + dexa methasone (Kd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd). In the study, treatment with Kd doubled the PFS, compared to Vd (18.7 months compared with 9.4 months, respectively).Citation59 Carfilzomib is also being investigated in combination with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone in patients with an average age of 74 years, and in doses as high as 56 mg/m2.Citation65Citation67 Additional studies have reported promising results with carfilzomib in combination with pomalidomide. In a trial of patients with relapsed and refractory MM, an ORR of 50% with carfilzomib and pomalidomide was observed.Citation68 Preliminary results of this and other studies demonstrate promising response rates with a tolerable safety profile, no unexpected toxicities, and merit the investigation of higher doses and in combination with other agents.Citation69Citation71

Common hematologic toxicities are thrombocytopenia, lymphopenia, and anemia. Nonhematologic toxicities include hypokalemia, cough, respiratory tract infections, and diarrhea. It is interesting that although venous thromboembolic event (VTE) prophylaxis is generally not recommended for proteasome inhibitors, there was an increase in VTE among patients who received Kd versus Vd in the ENDEAVOR trial, and therefore, VTE prophylaxis is recommended.Citation59 Since cardiac events such as congestive heart failure and cardiac arrest can occur, echocardiogram and electrocardiogram should be performed at baseline and periodically, as warranted. A longer infusion time of carfilzomib to be given over 30 minutes may also effectively reduce shortness of breath or symptoms and is currently recommended for all doses.Citation72,Citation73

Pomalidomide

Pomalidomide is an oral immunomodulatory agent that was approved for use by the FDA in 2013 for treatment of relapsed and refractory MM based on a Phase II randomized study of pomalidomide alone or in combination with dexamethasone.Citation74 An ORR of 33% was observed in the pomalidomide and dexamethasone group, with median PFS of 4.2 months. The combination was well tolerated in heavily pretreated patients who are refractory to bortezomib and lenalidomide. Neutropenia was mild and the most notable AE in the study.Citation42 Results of ongoing studies of pomalidomide in combination with bortezomib, ixazomib, cyclophosphamide, daratumumab, and pembrolizumab will undoubtedly further support the use of pomalidomide in MM, as preliminary results show high response rates in these combination regimens.Citation75Citation78

Panobinostat

Panobinostat is pandeacetylase (histone deacetylase) inhibitor that, through epigenetic alterations, impairs the growth and survival of MM cells. This an oral agent which is currently indicated for relapsed and refractory MM based on the results of a Phase II randomized study in which patients received bortezomib, panobinostat, and dexamethasone (PAN-BTZ-Dex) or BTZ-Dex alone. Patients who received PAN-BTZ-Dex experienced a PFS advantage of 10.6 months versus 5.8 months in patients who received BTZ-Dex alone.Citation79 A recent analysis showed a PFS benefit of 7.8 months for the PAN-BTZ-Dex group among those who received more than two regimens.Citation80 Common AEs in the PAN-BTZ-Dex versus BTZ-Dex group included thrombocytopenia (67% vs 31%), diarrhea (26% vs 8%), asthenia or fatigue (24% vs 12%), and peripheral neuropathy (18% vs 15%).

Based on common side effects in the study, patients should be closely monitored for diarrhea, electrolyte imbalance, and peripheral neuropathy. In the study, there was a high incidence of diarrhea, and 25% was severe. Therefore, loperamide is recommended to ameliorate diarrhea symptoms in patients who receive this three-drug regimen. Also, assessment and correction of blood electrolyte abnormalities is critical to prevent fatigue, muscle cramping, and potential electrocardiogram changes. Baseline and ongoing electrolyte monitoring should be employed on at least a monthly basis and include a complete metabolic panel + magnesium. Electrocardiogram monitoring to assess for prolongation of the QT-c interval should be performed at baseline and periodically in all patients and more often in those with known cardiac dysfunction. In the study, a high incidence of neuropathy was reported, likely due to IV administration of bortezomib. Thus, bortezomib should be given SC to minimize the onset of neuropathy, and all patients should be monitored closely for the onset of peripheral neuropathy symptoms.Citation73,Citation79

Ixazomib

Ixazomib is an oral proteasome inhibitor approved in the US for treatment of MM in patients who received one prior therapy. In the TOURMALINE MM-1 study, 722 patients who received one to three prior lines of therapy and were not refractory to prior lenalidomide or proteasome inhibitor based therapy were randomized to receive oral ixazomib 4 mg on days 1, 8, 15 every 28 days; oral lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1–21 q 28 days; and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, 22 (IRd), or lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) for up to twelve 28-day induction cycles. At interim analysis, an increased median PFS in the IRd versus Rd groups (20.6 vs 14.7 months) without a substantial increase in overall toxicity was observed.Citation81 Fairly common but mild side effects in patients who received IRd included peripheral neuropathy, diarrhea, constipation, rash, and myelosuppression. Therefore, education and assessment of these side effects is highly important.

Daratumumab

Daratumumab is a human, IgG1 kappa monoclonal antibody against CD38 with single agent activity, and is also effective in combination with other therapies. Daratumumab is approved for use in relapsed and refractory MM in patients who have received more than three prior therapies.Citation82,Citation83 A recent analysis of two key studies demonstrated exciting results and single agent activity. Among 148 heavily pretreated patients with MM, double-refractory to a proteosome inhibitor and immunomodulatory drug, a group that generally confers a poor prognosis, a combined ORR of 31% was observed.

Daratumumab is generally well tolerated; yet, there is a high incidence of infusion reactions with daratumumab, particularly with the first dose. Thus, it is recommended to give an IV corticosteroid (methylprednisolone 100 mg or equivalent dose), oral antipyretics (acetaminophen 650–1,000 mg PO), plus an antihistamine (such as diphenhydramine 25–50 mg PO/IV or equivalent) prior to each infusion. Postinfusion medications with an oral corticosteroid (such as methylprednisone 20 mg) should also be given on the first and second days after all infusions, and especially for the first four infusions.Citation84 Anecdotal evidence supports the use of montelukast and loratadine the day before daratumumab infusion and for the first and second days after the first three infusions.

Red blood cell (RBC) transfusions are often necessary in this heavily pretreated MM population. In an ongoing study, 40% of patients receiving daratumumab at a dose of 16 mg/kg as a monotherapy required blood transfusions. Blood typing for compatibility may be an issue, as daratumumab binds to CD38, a protein that is ubiquitously expressed on myeloma cells, but also expressed, to a lesser extent, on RBCs. As daratumumab interferes with antibody testing by binding to endogenous CD38 on RBCs, resulting in pan-agglutination, blood banks should be informed of patients receiving daratumumab to allow for the identification of safe blood products in these patients. Baseline compatibility typing should be performed before daratumumab treatment is started. Results should be recorded and referenced for all transfusions. For emergency transfusions, non–cross-matched, ABO–RhD-compatible RBCs can be given.

Elotuzumab

Elotuzumab (ELO) is an IV monoclonal antibody which targets the myeloma cells expressing signaling lymphocyte activation family 7 (SLAMF-7), which leads to cell death through promoting natural killer-mediated myeloma cell death.Citation43,Citation85 In a Phase III study, 321 patients were assigned to receive ELO and Rd, with 325 patients assigned to receive Rd alone. At 1 year, there was an improved PFS in the ELO and Rd group versus Rd alone (68% vs 57%), and at 2 years, the rates were 41% and 27%, respectively. The ORR in the ELO group was 79% versus 66% in the Rd group (P<0.001). A 30% relative reduction in PD or death was observed. Common grade 3 or 4 AEs in the two groups were lymphocytopenia, neutropenia, fatigue, and pneumonia. Infusion reactions were generally mild, but occurred in 33 patients (10%) in the ELO group and were grade 1 or 2 in 29 patients. Based on these side effects, regular complete blood count monitoring and premedication of ELO with corticosteroids is recommended.

Response monitoring and clonal evolution

Most patients will achieve a remission and then ultimately relapse. Remissions and relapses can occur over time and lead to clonal evolution, drug resistance, and ultimately drug-resistant disease.Citation86Citation88 Close monitoring of response to therapy and evaluation for biochemical and symptomatic disease progression are vital to prevent disease-related complications.

Supportive care

Patients are living longer than ever, in part, due to advances in supportive care within the last 20 years. Attention must be given to prevent and intervene on common myeloma-related complications. These include prevention of skeletal-related events with bisphosphonates, avoidance of nephrotoxic agents such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents or contrast dyes, immunization, and use of appropriate anti-infective and antiviral agents to treat infections.

Bone

Bone complications are common at diagnosis and throughout. Multiple cytokines and mechanisms are responsible for bone loss in MM, yet an age- or disease-related imbalance in osteoblast and osteoclast system occurs. Accelerated osteoclast activity without osteoblastic stimulation leads to bone turnover.Citation13,Citation14,Citation89,Citation90 Therefore, all patients with MM should receive bisphosphonates on a monthly basis for at least 12 months to prevent skeletal-related events, and possible antimyeloma benefit.Citation14,Citation91Citation95 A baseline dental evaluation and ongoing surveillance of complications such as osteonecrosis of the jaw and renal toxicity should be employed.Citation96 Regular physical activity such as walking, swimming, or light weight-bearing exercise should be encouraged to maintain mobility, decrease the risk of falls, and for overall health.Citation97 Regular monitoring of vitamin D levels and routine calcium and vitamin D intake are also recommended.Citation96,Citation98

Renal

The etiology of renal impairment in patients with MGUS or MM can be due to the disease itself or multifactorial. Patients with older age, long-standing comorbid illnesses such as hypertension or diabetes, hydronephrosis, renal obstruction, acute tubular injury, or concurrent amyloidosis are at a higher risk for renal insufficiency.Citation99 In patients with active MM, excess urinary light chains can overwhelm the proximal tubules as the level of light chain burden increases, hindering the kidneys’ ability to compensate, and combine with Tamm–Horsfall mucoprotein at the level of the nephrons, leading to cast nephropathy.Citation99

As a result of these MM-related and other factors, ∼50% of patients with MM will experience renal insufficiency throughout the course of their disease.Citation99 Medications such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, IV dyes, aminoglycoside antibiotics, and loop diuretics should thus be avoided, unless patients are closely monitored. Avoidance of dehydration with adequate fluid intake, especially if patients are experiencing diarrhea, which can occur with bortezomib, panobinostat, or long-term lenalidomide use, is recommended.Citation100 In patients with renal failure, aggressive oral or IV hydration and treatment of the disease or underlying cause is warranted.

Infections

Infections remain a common cause of early MM mortality, whether from neutropenia secondary to chemotherapy or from the disease itself. Bacterial and/or viral infections are common in MM and a leading cause of death.Citation101,Citation102 Functional impaired immunoglobulin synthesis, altered antibody formation after antigenic stimulation, and treatment-related myelosuppression from chemotherapy or steroid therapy place patients at risk to develop life-threatening infections.

The most common types of infections at diagnosis are Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and herpes shingles virus, although other types have been reported.Citation103 Seasonal inactivated influenza vaccination and immunization with polyvalent pneumococcal vaccines every 5 years (pneumococcal conjugate vaccine-13 and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 23) are recommend for all patients.Citation104 Attention to common causative organisms and appropriate and prompt antibiotic selection to treat these organisms are essential. For life-threatening or recurrent infections, IV immunoglobulin (IVIg) should be considered.Citation33

Peripheral neuropathy

Peripheral neuropathy can occur at diagnosis in a majority of individuals (20%), and in up to 75%, it occurs throughout the course of one’s illness. Improved survival and a longer lifespan for patients with MM are counterbalanced by these common and deleterious side effects of treatment. Peripheral neuropathy is commonly cited as a main side effect of MM therapy that affects one’s quality of life in a negative fashion.Citation105Citation107 Moderate-to-severe peripheral neuropathy secondary to bortezomib generally occurs within 4–6 months and can limit one’s ability to receive effective antimyeloma therapy with new and yet undiscovered agents.Citation108 Ixazomib, carfilzomib, vincristine, and thalidomide are agents which can cause neurotoxicity to a lesser extent than bortezomib.Citation109

No gold standard for the diagnosis of peripheral neuropathy exists. Electromyography, nerve conduction studies, and quantitative sensory testing are methods to quantify the extent of muscular or sensory nerve impairment. These techniques can be painful and often fail to capture the extent of the symptoms.Citation110,Citation111 Patients’ self-report of numbness, muscle weakness, tingling or paresthesias, combined with an astute physical examination are the two most reliable methods to report new-onset or worsening symptoms.Citation112 Since self-report is of high importance, the patient and caregiver must be educated on signs and symptoms of peripheral neuropathy, and advised to alert the providers of these symptoms. Prompt intervention of symptoms with holding, dose reduction, or discontinuation of the offending agent can lead to improvement of neuropathy symptoms.Citation106 Investigation into secondary causes of neuropathy, such as vitamin B6, B12 deficiencies, should be explored, as vitamin B deficiencies and diabetes are fairly common in MM.Citation106,Citation113,Citation114

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and VTEs

VTEs encompass DVT, which occurs in an extremity, and pulmonary embolism (PE). Patients with MM are at risk for life-threatening VTEs, as a result of their disease as well as individual and inherited risk factors. Immunomodulatory drugs, anthracyclines, carfilzomib (at a dose of 56 mg/m2 IV twice weekly), and erythropoiesis stimulating agents further contribute to the risk.Citation115 For all patients on IMiDs and carfilzomib, VTE risk stratification is imperative. Factors such as surgery, previous DVT or PE, obesity, history of cardiac or renal disease, and combination chemotherapy should be considered. If patients have nil or one risk factor, aspirin is recommended to further reduce the risk.Citation42,Citation59,Citation115,Citation116

Ongoing patient education should be targeted toward signs and symptoms of DVT or PE with prompt reporting of unilateral edema and coolness or pain in an extremity. Severe symptoms of PE with acute shortness of breath, anxiety, and tachycardia require emergent management. Ambulation and adequate hydration is recommended for all patients. Prophylactic anticoagulation with low-molecular-weight heparin in patients while being hospitalized, or full anticoagulation with warfarin, enoxaparin, or direct oral anticoagulants (in patients with glomerular filtration rate >30) in patients at a high risk for thrombosis is recommended.Citation117,Citation118

Survivorship in MM

Survivorship was once considered as the time period after the individual successfully completed cancer treatment. Since treatment is often ongoing in MM, survivorship in MM begins at diagnosis and continues through the balance of the individual’s life.Citation119 The importance of survivorship in cancer and the generation of a survivorship care plan (SCP) emerged following the release of an Institute of Medicine report that focused on the importance of health prevention and promotion models of care for cancer survivors.Citation120 To guide patients and primary providers on personalized screening recommendations based on prior chemotherapy, age, and other risk factors, an SCP is recommended for each individual with cancer. The provision of a care plan should be twofold and include: 1) a treatment summary and 2) essential components of a healthy lifestyle which include coordination of care among primary and other providers, health maintenance recommendations, early detection and screening, and psychosocial welfare.Citation119,Citation121

Until the last decade, patients with MM were not considered cancer survivors due to lack of effective treatment options. Patients with MM are living longer than ever, and health promotion and disease prevention are as important among this group as in others with a chronic illness.Citation122 Due to the complexity of current regimens to treat MM, a multidisciplinary team of physicians, advanced practice providers (such as nurse practitioners or physician assistants), nurses, pharmacists, and social workers is essential to enhance outcomes. Each member can take on a different role to educate patients on the complex treatment regimens, review and recommend supportive therapies (such as bisphosphonates, immunizations, and blood transfusions), and attend to symptom management (constipation, diarrhea, and other complications). Clinicians should consider the use of a treatment summary and/or provide an SCP to each patient to promote one’s understanding of the disease and enhance adherence.Citation121 The SCP can be as simple as a calendar list of appointments, printout, and review of current medications with recommended dose, duration, and rationale, and assessment and intervention of side effects. The importance of health maintenance with routine cancer and cardiovascular screening and partnership with a primary care provider should be emphasized for all.

Conclusion

MM is a heterogeneous disorder of the plasma cell, which remains incurable, but highly treatable. Advances in the understanding of plasma cell development within the bone marrow milieu have led to newer therapies with sophisticated mechanisms of action. It is essential for clinicians to be aware of the new drugs and common side effects for effective patient management. The provision of care plans, calendars, or other tools can help patients understand and adhere to treatment, and allow the patient to participate in one’s care.

Acknowledgments

BF serves as a consultant for Amgen, Celgene, and Takeda. JV is in speakers bureau of Celgene, Takeda, and Amgen.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

  • KyleRAGertzMAWitzigTEReview of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myelomaMayo Clin Proc2003781213312528874
  • Cancer IAfRoGLOBOCAN 2012 Estimated Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide Available from: http://globocan.iarc.fr/Pages/fact_sheets_population.aspx?country=900Accessed April 13, 2016
  • LandgrenORajkumarSVPfeifferRMObesity is associated with an increased risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance among black and white womenBlood201011671056105920421448
  • RajkumarSVDimopoulosMAPalumboAInternational Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myelomaLancet Oncol20141512e538e54825439696
  • FaimanBMyeloma genetics and genomics: practice implications and future directionsClin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk201414643644025127058
  • FonsecaRMongeJMyeloma: Classification and risk assessmentSemin Oncol201340555456624135400
  • LandgrenOMorganGJBiological frontiers in multiple myeloma: from biomarker identification to clinical practiceClin Cancer Res Epub20131122
  • Van WierSBraggioEBakerAHypodiploid multiple myeloma is characterized by more aggressive molecular markers than non-hyperdiploid multiple myelomaHaematologica Epub2013528
  • Vincent RajkumarSMultiple myeloma: 2014 Update on diagnosis, risk-stratification, and managementAm J Hematol20148910999100925223428
  • ShahJJAbonourRDurieBGMConnect MM®–the multiple myeloma (MM) disease registry: interim analysis of overall survival and outcomes in patients with high-risk diseaseBlood2014124212106
  • TerposEMoulopoulosLADimopoulosMAAdvances in imaging and the management of myeloma bone diseaseJ Clin Oncol201129141907191521483016
  • RoodmanGDMechanisms of bone metastasisN Engl J Med2004350161655166415084698
  • RajeNRoodmanGDAdvances in the biology and treatment of bone disease in multiple myelomaClin Cancer Res20111761278128621411443
  • TerposEMorganGDimopoulosMAInternational Myeloma Working Group recommendations for the treatment of multiple myeloma-related bone diseaseJ Clin Oncol201331182347235723690408
  • DimopoulosMAHillengassJUsmaniSRole of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of patients with multiple myeloma: a consensus statementJ Clin Oncol201533665766425605835
  • DurieBGMHarousseauJLMiguelJSInternational uniform response criteria for multiple myelomaLeukemia20062091467147316855634
  • LandgrenOGraubardBIKatzmannJARacial disparities in the prevalence of monoclonal gammopathies: a population-based study of 12,482 persons from the National Health and Nutritional Examination SurveyLeukemia20142871537154224441287
  • RajkumarSVKyleRATherneauTMSerum free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significanceBlood2005106381281715855274
  • KatzmannJAClarkRKyleRASuppression of uninvolved immunoglobulins defined by heavy/light chain pair suppression is a risk factor for progression of MGUSLeukemia201327120821222781594
  • KyleRADurieBGMRajkumarSVMonoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma: IMWG consensus perspectives risk factors for progression and guidelines for monitoring and managementLeukemia20102461121112720410922
  • LarsenJTKumarSKDispenzieriAKyleRAKatzmannJARajkumarSVSerum free light chain ratio as a biomarker for high-risk smoldering multiple myelomaLeukemia201327494194623183428
  • RajkumarSVEvolving diagnostic criteria for multiple myelomaHematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program20152015127227826637733
  • WaxmanAMickRGarfallAModeling the risk of progression in smoldering multiple myelomaJ Clin Oncol2014325s (suppl):abstract 8607
  • DispenzieriAKyleRMerliniGInternational Myeloma Working Group guidelines for serum-free light chain analysis in multiple myeloma and related disordersLeukemia200823221522419020545
  • DispenzieriAKyleRAKatzmannJAImmunoglobulin free light chain ratio is an independent risk factor for progression of smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myelomaBlood2008111278578917942755
  • KastritisETerposEMoulopoulosLExtensive bone marrow infiltration and abnormal free light chain ratio identifies patients with asymptomatic myeloma at high risk for progression to symptomatic diseaseLeukemia201327494795323183429
  • HillengassJWeberMAKilkKPrognostic significance of whole-body MRI in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significanceLeukemia201428117417823958921
  • DurieBGSalmonSEA clinical staging system for multiple myeloma: correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features, response to treatment and survivalCancer1975368428541182674
  • GreippPRMiguelJSDurieBGMInternational staging system for multiple myelomaJ Clin Oncol200523153412342015809451
  • LonialSAndersonKCAssociation of response endpoints with survival outcomes in multiple myelomaLeukemia201428225826823868105
  • FonsecaRBarlogieBBatailleRGenetics and cytogenetics of multiple myelomaCancer Res20046441546155814989251
  • PalumboAAvet-LoiseauHOlivaSRevised international staging system for multiple myeloma: a report from International Myeloma Working GroupJ Clin Oncol Epub201583
  • NCCNNCCN Multiple Myeloma Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology v2.2016The Complete Library of NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in OncologyJenkintown, PAAuthor2016
  • KumarSKRajkumarSVDispenzieriAImproved survival in multiple myeloma and the impact of novel therapiesBlood200811152516252017975015
  • RichardsonPGBarlogieBBerensonJA phase 2 study of bortezomib in relapsed, refractory myelomaN Engl J Med2003348262609261712826635
  • RichardsonPGSonneveldPSchusterMWAssessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions (APEX) InvestigatorsBortezomib or high-dose dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myelomaN Engl J Med2005352242487249815958804
  • RichardsonPGBloodEMitsiadesCSA randomized phase 2 study of lenalidomide therapy for patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myelomaBlood2006108103458346416840727
  • RichardsonPGSonneveldPSchusterMExtended follow-up of a phase 3 trial in relapsed multiple myeloma: final time-to-event results of the APEX trialBlood2007110103557356017690257
  • San MiguelJFSchlagRKhuagevaNKVISTA Trial InvestigatorsBortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myelomaN Engl J Med2008359990691718753647
  • RichardsonPJagannathSHusseinMSafety and efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myelomaBlood2009114477277819471019
  • RichardsonPGSchlossmanRLAlsinaMPANORAMA 2: panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed and bortezomib-refractory myelomaBlood2013122142331233723950178
  • RichardsonPGSiegelDSVijRPomalidomide alone or in combination with low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: a randomized phase 2 studyBlood2014123121826183224421329
  • LonialSDimopoulosMPalumboAELOQUENT-2 InvestigatorsElotuzumab therapy for relapsed or refractory multiple myelomaN Engl J Med2015373762163126035255
  • StewartAKRajkumarSVDimopoulosMAASPIRE InvestigatorsCarfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myelomaN Engl J Med2015372214215225482145
  • BenboubkerLDimopoulosMADispenzieriAFIRST Trial TeamLenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible patients with myelomaN Engl J Med20143711090691725184863
  • RichardsonPGJagannathSMoreauPFinal results for the 1703 phase 1b/2 study of elotuzumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma56th ASH Annual Meeting and ExpositionDecember 6–9, 2014San Francisco, CA1242014
  • RichardsonPWellerELonialSLenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone combination therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma [abstract 92]Blood2010116567968620385792
  • DimopoulosMAKastritisEChristoulasDTreatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma with lenalidomide and dexamethasone with or without bortezomib: prospective evaluation of the impact of cytogenetic abnormalities and of previous therapiesLeukemia201024101769177820739955
  • DurieBHoeringARajkumarSVBortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone vs. lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients (Pts) with previously untreated multiple myeloma without an intent for immediate autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT): results of the randomized phase III trial SWOG S0777Blood20151262325
  • MoreauPPylypenkoHGrosickiSSubcutaneous versus intravenous administration of bortezomib in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma: a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority studyLancet Oncol201112543144021507715
  • FaimanBElsonPSmithMNeuropathy and efficacy of weekly subcutaneous bortezomib in myeloma and AL amyloidosisBlood2013122211975
  • RajkumarSVJacobusSCallanderNSEastern Cooperative Oncology GroupLenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone versus lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone as initial therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: an open-label randomised controlled trialLancet Oncol2010111293719853510
  • WeberDMChenCNiesvizkyRMultiple Myeloma (009) Study InvestigatorsLenalidomide plus dexamethasone for relapsed multiple myeloma in North AmericaN Engl J Med2007357212133214218032763
  • WangMDimopoulosMAChenCLenalidomide plus dexamethasone is more effective than dexamethasone alone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma regardless of prior thalidomide exposureBlood2008112124445445118799726
  • PalumboARajkumarSVSan MiguelJFInternational Myeloma Working Group consensus statement for the management, treatment, and supportive care of patients with myeloma not eligible for standard autologous stem-cell transplantationJ Clin Oncol201432658760024419113
  • LaroccaAPalumboAHow I treat fragile myeloma patientsBlood Epub2015831
  • ChenNLauHKongLPharmacokinetics of lenalidomide in subjects with various degrees of renal impairment and in subjects on hemodialysisJ Clin Pharmacol200747121466147517954615
  • PalumboABringhenSLudwigHPersonalized therapy in multiple myeloma according to patient age and vulnerability: a report of the European Myeloma Network (EMN)Blood2011118174519452921841166
  • DimopoulosMAMoreauPPalumboAENDEAVOR investigatorsCarfilzomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (ENDEAVOR): a randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre studyLancet Oncol2016171273826671818
  • SiegelDMartinTWangMA phase 2 study of single-agent carfilzomib (PX-171003-A1) in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myelomaBlood2012120142817282522833546
  • JagannathSVijRStewartAKAn open-label single-arm pilot phase II study (PX-171003-A0) of low-dose, single-agent carfilzomib in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myelomaClin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk201212531031823040437
  • VijRSiegelDJagannathSAn open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study of single-agent carfilzomib in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma who have been previously treated with bortezomibBr J Haematol2012158673974822845873
  • VijRWangMKaufmanJLAn open-label, single-arm, phase 2 (PX-171004) study of single-agent carfilzomib in bortezomib-naive patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myelomaBlood2012119245661567022555973
  • BadrosAZVijRMartinTCarfilzomib in multiple myeloma patients with renal impairment: pharmacokinetics and safetyLeukemia Epub2013131
  • PalumboARossiDBringhenSWeekly carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (wCCd) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients: A phase I–II study56th ASH Annual Meeting and ExpositionDecember 6–9, 2014San Francisco, CA1242014
  • SquiffletPMichielsSSiegelDSVijRRoSBuyseMEMultivariate modelling reveals evidence of a dose-response relationship in phase 2 studies of single-agent carfilzomib [abstract]Blood201111821 Abstract 1877
  • LendvaiNLandauHLesokhinAPhase II study of infusional carfilzomib in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myelomaBlood2012120 Abstract 947
  • StadtmauerEShahJAbonourRCarfilzomib, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (CPomd) for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): a phase I/II trialClin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk201313Supplement 1P250
  • ShahJThomasSWeberDPhase 1/1b study of the efficacy and safety of the combination of panobinostat + carfilzomib in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myelomaBlood2012120 Abstract 4081
  • BerdejaJHartLLamarRMurphyPMorganSIFlinnIPhase I/II study of panobinostat and carfilzomib in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM), interim phase I safety analysisBlood2012120 Abstract 4048
  • KaufmanJZimmermanTJakubowiakAPhase I study of the combination of carfilzomib and panobinostat for patients with relapsed and refractory myeloma: a multicenter MMRC clinical trialHaematologica201398Supplement 1 Abstract P771
  • AmgenKYPROLIS™ (carfilzomib) for Injection, for intravenous useSouth San Francisco, CA2016
  • ColsonKTreatment-related symptom management in patients with multiple myeloma: a reviewSupportive Care Cancer201523514311445
  • CorporationCPomalidomide (Pomalyst) [package insert]Summit, NJAuthor2013
  • LacyMQLaPlantBRLaumannKMPomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVD) for patients with relapsed lenalidomide refractory multiple myeloma (MM)56th ASH Annual Meeting and ExpositionDecember 6–9, 2014San Francisco, CA1242014
  • BazRMartinTGAlsinaMPomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone is superior to pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed and refractory myeloma: results of a multicenter randomized phase II study56th ASH Annual Meeting and ExpositionDecember 6–9, 2014San Francisco, CA1242014
  • BadrosAZKocogluMHMaNA phase II study of anti PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM)Blood201512623506
  • ChariALonialSSuvannasankhaAOpen-label, multicenter, phase 1b study of daratumumab in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with at least 2 lines of prior therapy and relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myelomaBlood20151262350826082451
  • San-MiguelJFHungriaVTYoonSSPanobinostat plus bortezomib and dexamethasone versus placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind phase 3 trialLancet Oncol201415111195120625242045
  • RichardsonPGHungriaVTYoonSSPanobinostat plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in relapsed/relapsed and refractory myeloma: outcomes by prior treatmentBlood Epub2015122
  • MoreauPMassziTGrzaskoNIxazomib, an investigational oral proteasome inhibitor (PI), in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd), significantly extends progression-free survival (PFS) for patients (Pts) with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): the phase 3 tourmaline-MM1 study (NCT01564537)Blood201512623727
  • UsmaniSWeissBBahlisNJClinical efficacy of daratumumab monotherapy in patients with heavily pretreated relapsed or refractory multiple myelomaBlood20151262329
  • PlesnerTArkenauH-TGimsingPDaratumumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: updated results of a phase 1/2 study (GEN503)Blood201512623507
  • JanssenDaratumumab (DARZALEX) injection2015
  • HsiEDSteinleRBalasaBCS1, a potential new therapeutic antibody target for the treatment of multiple myelomaClin Cancer Res20081492775278418451245
  • EganJBShiC-XTembeWWhole-genome sequencing of multiple myeloma from diagnosis to plasma cell leukemia reveals genomic initiating events, evolution, and clonal tidesBlood201212051060106622529291
  • KeatsJJChesiMEganJBClonal competition with alternating dominance in multiple myelomaBlood201212051067107622498740
  • Lohr JensGStojanovPCarter ScottLWidespread genetic heterogeneity in multiple myeloma: implications for targeted therapyCancer Cell20142519110124434212
  • RajeNSWillenbacherWHungriaVEvaluating results from the multiple myeloma subset of patients treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid (ZA) in a randomized phase III studyASCO Meeting Abstracts20133115_suppl8589
  • TerposEBerensonJRajeNRoodmanGDManagement of bone disease in multiple myelomaExpert Rev Hematol20147111312524433088
  • BerensonJREfficacy of pamidronate in reducing skeletal events in patients with advanced multiple myeloma. Myeloma Aredia Study GroupN Engl J Med19963344884938559201
  • MachadoMCruzLSTannusGFonsecaMEfficacy of clodronate, pamidronate, and zoledronate in reducing morbidity and mortality in cancer patients with bone metastasis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trialsClin Ther200931596297919539097
  • AaproMSaadFCostaLOptimizing clinical benefits of bisphosphonates in cancer patients with bone metastasesOncologist201015111147115821051658
  • GimsingPCarlsonKTuressonIEffect of pamidronate 30 mg versus 90 mg on physical function in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (Nordic Myeloma Study Group): a double-blind, randomised controlled trialLancet Oncol2010111097398220863761
  • MorganGJDaviesFEGregoryWMNational Cancer Research Institute Haematological Oncology Clinical Study GroupFirst-line treatment with zoledronic acid as compared with clodronic acid in multiple myeloma (MRC Myeloma IX): a randomised controlled trialLancet201037697571989199921131037
  • MiceliTColsonKFaimanBMillerKTarimanJInternational Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardMaintaining bone health in patients with multiple myelomaClin J Oncol Nurs201115923
  • RomeSIJenkinsBSLillebyKEInternational Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardMobility and safety in the multiple myeloma survivor: survivorship care plan of the International Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardClin J Oncol Nurs201115Suppl4152
  • BilottiEFaimanBRichardsTTarimanJDMiceliTRomeSInternational Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardSurvivorship care guidelines for patients living with multiple myeloma: consensus statements of the International Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardClin J Oncol Nurs201115Suppl5821816706
  • FaimanBManganPSpongJETarimanJDThe International Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardRenal complications in multiple myeloma and related disorders: survivorship care plan of the IMF Nurse Leadership BoardClin J Oncol Nurs201115Suppl667621816711
  • FaimanBSidanaSElsonPLenalidomide related diarrhea correlates with survival in multiple myelomaBlood2013122215397
  • NucciMAnaissieEInfections in patients with multiple myeloma in the era of high-dose therapy and novel agentsClin Infect Dis20094981211122519769539
  • KalambokisGNChristouLTsianosEVMultiple myeloma presenting with an acute bacterial infectionInt J Lab Hematol200931437538319486365
  • DurieBGKyleRABelchAScientific Advisors of the International Myeloma FoundationMyeloma management guidelines: a consensus report from the Scientific Advisors of the International Myeloma FoundationHematol J20034637939814671610
  • PreventionCDCcontrol of influenza with vaccines. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)MMWR2010598
  • VisovskyCHaasMFaimanBNurse self-evaluation of assessment of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in patients with cancerJ Adv Pract Oncol2012331932525031961
  • RichardsonPGDelforgeMBeksacMManagement of treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy in multiple myelomaLeukemia201226459560822193964
  • TarimanJLoveGMcCullaghESandiferSIMF Nurse Leadership BoardPeripheral neuropathy associated with novel therapies in patients with multiple myeloma: consensus statement of the IMF nurse leadership boardClin J Oncol Nurs200812293518490255
  • BroylAJongenJLMSonneveldPGeneral aspects and mechanisms of peripheral neuropathy associated with bortezomib in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myelomaSemin Hematol201249324925722726548
  • OncologyTBortezomib (Velcade) [package insert]Cambridge, MAAuthor2015
  • PrestonDShapiroBElectromyography and Neuromuscular Disorders: Clinical-Electrophysiologic Correlations2 edBostonButterworth-Heinemann2005
  • PonceletANAn algorithm for the evaluation of peripheral neuropathyAm Fam Physician19981557755764
  • CalhounEWelshmanEChangCPsychometric Evaluation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity (FACT/GOG-Ntx) questionnaire for patients receiving systemic chemotherapyInt J Gynecol Cancer20031374174814675309
  • BazRAlemanyCGreenRHusseinMAPrevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency in patients with plasma cell dyscrasiasCancer2004101479079515305411
  • BadrosAGoloubevaODalalJSNeurotoxicity of bortezomib therapy in multiple myeloma: a single-center experience and review of the literatureCancer200711051042104917654660
  • PalumboARajkumarSVDimopoulosMAInternational Myeloma Working GroupPrevention of thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated thrombosis in myelomaLeukemia200822241442318094721
  • BazRLiLKottke-MarchantKThe role of aspirin in the prevention of thrombotic complications of thalidomide and anthra-cycline-based chemotherapy for multiple myelomaMayo Clin Proc200580121568157416342649
  • LymanGHBohlkeKKhoranaAAVenous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update 2014J Clin Oncol201533665465625605844
  • van EsNBüllerHRUsing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in cancer and other high-risk populationsHematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program20152015112513126637711
  • DenlingerCSCarlsonRWAreMSurvivorship: introduction and definition. Clinical practice guidelines in oncologyJ Natl Compr Canc Netw2014121344524453291
  • National Cancer InstituteAbout cancer survivorship research: survivorship definitions2014 Available from: http://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/ocs/Accessed August 22, 2014
  • TaylorKMonterossoLSurvivorship care plans and treatment summaries in adult patients with hematologic cancer: an integrative literature reviewOncol Nurs Forum201542328329125901380
  • BilottiEGleasonCMcNeillAInternational Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardRoutine health maintenance in patients living with multiple myeloma: survivorship care plan of the International Myeloma Foundation Nurse Leadership BoardClin J Oncol Nurs201115Supp254021816708
  • FaimanBBilottiEManganPRogersKSteroid-associated side effects in patients with multiple myeloma: consensus statement of the IMF Nurse Leadership BoardClinical Journal of Oncology Nursing200812536218490257
  • RomeSDossDMillerKWestphalJThromboembolic events associated with novel therapies in patients with multiple myeloma: Consensus statement of the IMF Nurse Leadership BoardClinical Journal of Oncology Nursing2008122128
  • RichardsTBrigleKJPalliative care in multiple myelomaJ Adv Pract Oncol201673143