Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The ANZCTR website will be unavailable from 1pm until 3pm (AEDT) on Wednesday the 30th of October for website maintenance. Please be sure to log out of the system in order to avoid any loss of data.
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00405756
Registration number
NCT00405756
Ethics application status
Date submitted
29/11/2006
Date registered
30/11/2006
Date last updated
11/01/2017
Titles & IDs
Public title
A Study to Compare MPR With MP in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Subjects 65 Years Old or Older.
Query!
Scientific title
A Phase III, Multicentre, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, 3-Arm Parallel Group Study To Determine The Efficacy And Safety Of Lenalidomde (Revlimid®) In Combination With Melphalan And Prednisone Versus Placebo Plus Melphalan And Prednisone In Subjects With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are 65 Years Of Age Or Older
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
2006-001865-41
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
CC-5013-MM-015
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Cancer
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other cancer types
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Drugs - Lenalidomide: Double-blind Induction
Treatment: Drugs - Melphalan
Treatment: Drugs - Prednisone
Treatment: Drugs - Aspirin
Treatment: Drugs - Placebo
Treatment: Drugs - Lenalidomide: Double-blind Maintenance
Treatment: Drugs - Lenalidomide: Open-label
Experimental: MPR+R - Double-blind induction therapy with melphalan/prednisone and lenalidomide 10 mg (MPR) for up to 9 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with single-agent lenalidomide (R) 10mg from cycle 10 to disease progression. Optional open-label extension therapy with lenalidomide up to 25 mg for participants with progressive disease.
Experimental: MPR+p - Double-blind induction therapy with melphalan/prednisone and lenalidomide 10mg (MPR) for up to 9 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with placebo (p) from cycle 10 to disease progression. Optional open-label extension therapy with lenalidomide up to 25 mg for participants with progressive disease.
Other: MPp+p - Double-blind induction therapy with melphalan/prednisone and placebo (MPp) for up to 9 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy with placebo (p) from cycle 10 to disease progression. Optional open-label extension therapy with lenalidomide up to 25 mg for participants with progressive disease.
Treatment: Drugs: Lenalidomide: Double-blind Induction
Double-blind Induction: the starting lenalidomide oral dosing regimen was 10 mg once daily on Days 1 through 21 of each 28 day cycle for up to 9 cycles. Dose was reduced if needed due to dose-limiting toxicity.
Treatment: Drugs: Melphalan
Double-blind Induction: the starting melphalan oral dosing regimen in all 3 treatment arms was 0.18 mg/kg daily on Days 1 through 4 of each 28-day cycle for up to 9 cycles. Dose was reduced if needed due to dose-limiting toxicity.
Treatment: Drugs: Prednisone
Double-blind induction: the starting prednisone oral dosing regimen in all 3 treatment arms was 2 mg/kg daily on Days 1 through 4 of each 28-day cycle for up to 9 cycles. Dose was reduced if needed due to dose-limiting toxicity.
Treatment: Drugs: Aspirin
Double-blind induction: low-dose aspirin 75 mg to 100 mg daily for all treatment arms.
Double-blind maintenance: at the investigator's discretion
Treatment: Drugs: Placebo
Double-blind induction: participants in treatment arm MPp+p received placebo once daily on Days 1 through 21 of each 28-day cycle for up to 9 cycles.
Double-blind maintenance: participants in treatment arms MPR+p and MPp+p received placebo once daily on Days 1 through 21 of each 28-day cycle from cycle 10 to disease progression.
Treatment: Drugs: Lenalidomide: Double-blind Maintenance
Single-agent oral lenalidomide 10 mg once daily on Days 1 through 21 of each 28-day cycle from cycle 10 to disease progression.
Treatment: Drugs: Lenalidomide: Open-label
Any study participant who had progressive disease had the option of open-label lenalidomide up to 25 mg daily on Days 1 through 21 of each 28-day cycle.
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Drugs
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival (PFS) Based on the Response Assessment by the Central Adjudication Committee (CAC)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. PFS was calculated as the time from randomization to the earlier of the first documentation of progressive disease (PD) as determined by the CAC, or death on study due to any cause. PD was based on the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation/International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry/Autologous Bone Marrow Transplant Registry \[EBMT/IBMTR/ABMTR\] criteria.
PD criteria includes increasing monoclonal paraprotein levels, bone marrow findings, worsening lytic bone disease, progressively enlarging extramedullary plasmacytomas, or hypercalcemia.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
up to 165 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival (PFS) From Start of Maintenance Therapy Period Based on the Response Assessment by the Central Adjudication Committee (CAC)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. PFS calculated from the start of the Maintenance period to the earlier of the first documentation of progressive disease (PD) as determined by the CAC, or death on study due to any cause.
PD was based on the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation/International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry/Autologous Bone Marrow Transplant Registry \[EBMT/IBMTR/ABMTR\] criteria.
PD criteria includes increasing monoclonal paraprotein levels, bone marrow findings, worsening lytic bone disease, progressively enlarging extramedullary plasmacytomas, or hypercalcemia.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
Approximately week 37 (start of cycle 10) to week 165
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Overall Survival (OS)
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time between randomization and death. Participants who died, regardless of the cause of death, were considered to have had an event. Participants who were lost to follow-up prior to the end of the trial, or who were withdrawn from the trial, were censored at the time of last contact. Participants who were still being treated were censored at the last available date available, or clinical cut-off date, if it was earlier.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
up to 177 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Progression (TTP) Based on the Response Assessment by the Central Adjudication Committee (CAC)
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. TTP was the time between randomization and disease progression as determined by the CAC. PD was based on the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation/International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry/Autologous Bone Marrow Transplant Registry \[EBMT/IBMTR/ABMTR\] criteria.
PD criteria includes increasing monoclonal paraprotein levels, bone marrow findings, worsening lytic bone disease, progressively enlarging extramedullary plasmacytomas, or hypercalcemia.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
up to 165 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Number of Participants in Disease Response Categories Representing Their Best Response During the Double-blind Treatment Period
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. Best response was determined by the Central Assessment Committee (CAC) based on the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria: Complete Response (CR)-absence of serum and urine monoclonal paraprotein for 6 weeks, plus no increase in size or number of bone lesions, plus other factors); Partial Response (PR)-not all CR criteria, plus \>=50% reduction in serum monoclonal paraprotein plus others; Stable Disease (SD)- not PR or PD; Progressive Disease (PD)- reappearance of monoclonal paraprotein, bone lesions, other; Not Evaluable (NE).
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Up to 165 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Time to First Response
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. Time to first response was defined as the time from start of treatment until first response as assessed by the Central Assessment Committee (CMC) based on European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Up to 66 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates for Duration of Response as Determined by the Central Adjudication Committee (CAC)
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. Duration of myeloma response was defined as the time from the initial response date to the earlier of progressive disease (PD) as determined by the CAC or death on study. PD was based on the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation/International Bone Marrow Transplant Registry/Autologous Bone Marrow Transplant Registry \[EBMT/IBMTR/ABMTR\] criteria.
PD criteria includes increasing monoclonal paraprotein levels, bone marrow findings, worsening lytic bone disease, progressively enlarging extramedullary plasmacytomas, or hypercalcemia.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Up to 149 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates for Time to Next Antimyeloma Therapy
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. Time to the next antimyeloma therapy was defined as time from randomization to the start of another non-protocol antimyeloma therapy. Participants who do not receive another anti-myeloma therapy were censored at the last assessment or follow-up visit known to have received no new therapy.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Up to 168 weeks
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Summary of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) During the Double-Blind Treatment Period
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. Participant counts in different categories of TEAEs during the double-blind treatment period. A TEAE is as any AE occurring or worsening on or after the first treatment of any study drug, and within 30 days after the last dose of the last study drug. Severity grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE) on a 1-5 scale: Grade 1= Mild AE, Grade 2= Moderate AE, Grade 3= Severe AE, Grade 4= Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5=Death related to AE. Dose reduction includes reduction with or without interruption.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
Up to 169 weeks (Double-blind therapy period plus 4 weeks)
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Global Quality of Life Scale
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLC-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the quality of life in cancer patients. EORTC QLQ-C30 includes functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, social), global health status, symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting), and other (dyspnoea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation/diarrhea, financial difficulties). Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); two used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score = better quality of life.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Physical Functioning Scale
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score=better level of physical functioning.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Role Functioning Scale
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score=better level of role functioning.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Emotional Functioning Scale
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score = better level of emotional functioning.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Congitive Functioning Scale
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score = better level of cognitive functioning.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Social Functioning Scale
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score = better level of social functioning.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Fatigue Scale
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the fatigue scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Nausea and Vomiting Scale
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the nausea/vomiting scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Pain Scale
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the pain scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Dyspnoea Scale
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the dyspnoea scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Insomnia Scale
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the insomnia scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Appetite Loss Scale
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the appetite loss scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Constipation Scale
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the constipation scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Diarrhoea Scale
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a symptom scale like the diarrhea scale = higher level of symptomatology/problems.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13 and 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Financial Difficulties Scale
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 30-item questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. Most questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'); 2 questions used 7-point scale (1 'Very Poor' to 7 'Excellent'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for a problem scale like the financial problems scale = higher level of financial problems.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Disease Symptoms Scale
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for the disease symptoms scale = higher level of symptomatology.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) In Side Effects of Treatment Scale
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. Questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale; higher score for the side effects scale = higher level of symptomatology.
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) In Future Perspective Scale
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. Questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale. For the future perspective scale, higher score = better perspective of the future.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Change From Baseline to Cycles 4, 7, 10, 13, 16 in European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) In Body Image Scale
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
Data as of 11 May 2010 cutoff. EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. Questions used 4-point scale (1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores are averaged, and transformed to 0-100 scale. For the body image scale, higher scores = better body image.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Baseline (Day 0), Months 4, 7, 10, 13, 16
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria
1. Must understand and voluntarily sign an informed consent form
2. Age greater than or equal to 65 years at the time of signing the informed consent
3. Newly diagnosed with symptomatic multiple myeloma as defined by the 3 criteria below:
MM diagnostic criteria (all of next 3 required)
1. Monoclonal plasma cells in the bone marrow greater than or equal to 10% and/or presence of a biopsy-proven plasmacytoma
2. Monoclonal protein present in the serum and/or urine
3. Myeloma-related organ dysfunction (at least one of the following) [C] Calcium elevation in the blood (serum calcium >10.5mg/dl or upper limit of normal) [R] Renal insufficiency (serum creatinine >2mg/dl) [A] Anemia (hemoglobin <10g/dl or 2g < normal) [B] Lytic bone lesions or osteoporosis AND have measurable disease as defined by the following; IgG multiple myeloma: Serum monoclonal paraprotein (M-protein) level greater than or equal to 1.0 g/dL or urine M-protein level greater than or equal to 200 mg/24 hours IgA multiple myeloma: Serum M-protein level greater than or equal to 0.5 g/dL or urine M-protein level greater than or equal to 200 mg/24 hours IgD multiple myeloma: Serum M-protein level greater than or equal to 0.05 g/dL or urine M-protein level greater than or equal to 200 mg/24 hours Light chain multiple myeloma: Serum M-protein level greater than or equal to 1.0 g/dL or urine M-protein level greater than or equal to 200 mg/24 hours IgM multiple myeloma (IgM M-protein plus lytic bone disease documented by skeletal survey plain films): Serum M-protein level greater than or equal to 1.0g/dL or urine M-protein level greater than or equal to 200mg/24hours
4. Karnofsky performance status greater than or equal to 60%.
5. Able to adhere to the study visit schedule and other protocol requirements.
6. Women of Childbearing potential (WCBP) must:
a. Have a negative medically supervised pregnancy test prior to the start of study therapy. She must agree to ongoing pregnancy testing during the course of the study, and after end of study therapy. This applies even if the subject practices and continues sexual abstinence.
b Either commit to continued abstinence from heterosexual intercourse (which must be reviewed on a monthly basis) or agree to use, and be able to comply with, effective contraception without interruption, 28 days prior to starting study drug, during the study therapy (including dose interruptions), and for 28 days after discontinuation of study therapy.
7. Males Subjects must:
1. Agree to use a condom during sexual contact with a WCBP, even if they have had a vasectomy, throughout study drug therapy, during any dose interruption and after the cessation of study therapy.
2. Agree to not donate semen during study drug therapy and for a period after end of study drug therapy.
8. All subjects must
1. Have an understanding that the study drug could have potential teratogenic risk.
2. Agree to abstain from donating blood while taking study drug therapy and following discontinuation of study drug therapy.
3. Agree not to share study medication with another person.
4. All patients must be counseled about pregnancy precautions and risks of fetal exposure.
Female Subjects:
Females of childbearing potential (FCBP) with regular cycles must agree to have pregnancy tests weekly for the first 28 days of study participation and then every 28 days while on study, at study discontinuation, and at day 28 following discontinuation from the study. If menstrual cycles are irregular, the pregnancy testing must occur weekly for the first 28 days and then every 14 days while on study, at study discontinuation, and at days 14 and 28 following discontinuation from the study.
In addition to the required pregnancy testing, the Investigator must confirm with FCBP that she is continuing to use two reliable methods of birth control at each visit. Counseling about pregnancy precautions and the potential risks of fetal exposure must be conducted at a minimum of every 28 days. During counseling, subjects must be reminded to not share study drug and to not donate blood.
Pregnancy testing and counseling must be performed if a subject misses her period or if her pregnancy test or her menstrual bleeding is abnormal. Study drug treatment must be discontinued during this evaluation.
Females must agree to abstain from breastfeeding during study participation and for at least 28 days after the discontinuation from the study.
Male Subjects:
Counseling about the requirement for latex condom use during sexual contact with females of childbearing potential and the potential risks of fetal exposure must be conducted at a minimum of every 28 days. During counseling, subjects must be reminded to not share study drug and to not donate blood, sperm, or semen.
If pregnancy or a positive pregnancy test does occur in a study subject or the partner of a study subject during study participation, study drug must be immediately discontinued.
Query!
Minimum age
65
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
Exclusion Criteria
1. Previous treatment with antimyeloma therapy (does not include radiotherapy, bisphosphonates, or a single short course of steroid [i.e., less than or equal to the equivalent of dexamethasone 40 mg/day for 4 days; such a short course of steroid treatment must not have been given within 28 days [4 weeks] of randomization]).
2. Any serious medical condition, including the presence of laboratory abnormalities, which places the subject at an unacceptable risk if he or she participates in this study or confounds experimental the ability to interpret data from the study.
3. Pregnant or lactating females.
4. Radiotherapy within 14 days (2 weeks) of randomization.
5. Plasmapheresis within 28 days (4 weeks) of randomization.
6. Any of the following laboratory abnormalities:
Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 1,500 cells/mL (1.5*10^9/L) Platelet count < 75,000 cells/uL (75*10^9/L) for subjects in whom < 50% of bone marrow nucleated cells are plasma cells; but platelet count <30,000/uL for subjects in whom >= 50% of bone marrow nucleated cells are plasma cells Haemoglobin < 8.0 g/dL (80 g/L) Serum creatinine > 2.5 mg/dL (221 µmol/L) Serum aspartate aminotransferase (SGOT/AST) or alanine aminotransferase (SGPT/ALT) > 3.0 times upper limit of normal (ULN)
7. Prior history of malignancies, other than multiple myeloma, unless the subject has been free of the disease for greater than or equal to 3 years.
Exceptions include the following:
Basal cell carcinoma of the skin Squamous cell carcinoma of the skin Carcinoma in situ of the cervix Carcinoma in situ of the breast Incidental histologic finding of prostate cancer (TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours (TNM) stage of T1a or T1b)
8. Neuropathy of >= grade 2 severity.
9. Known human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positivity or active infectious hepatitis, type A, B or C.
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Query!
Masking / blinding
Blinded (masking used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
The people receiving the treatment/s
The people administering the treatment/s
The people assessing the outcomes
The people analysing the results/data
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Phase 3
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Query!
Data analysis
Query!
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Query!
Other reasons
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
1/01/2007
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
1/04/2016
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
459
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
QLD,SA
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Hematology Oncology Clinics of Australia, Level 5, Mater Medical Centre - South Brisbane
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
Royal Adelaide Hospital Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science - Adelaide
Query!
Recruitment hospital [3]
0
0
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital - Camperdown
Query!
Recruitment hospital [4]
0
0
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Divsion of Haematology Medical Oncology - East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [5]
0
0
Frankston Hospital - Frankston
Query!
Recruitment hospital [6]
0
0
The Alfred Hospital - Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [7]
0
0
Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital - Nedlands
Query!
Recruitment hospital [8]
0
0
Princess Alexandra Hospital - Woolloongabba
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
4101 - South Brisbane
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
5000 - Adelaide
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [3]
0
0
2050 - Camperdown
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [4]
0
0
3006 - East Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [5]
0
0
3199 - Frankston
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [6]
0
0
3141 - Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [7]
0
0
6009 - Nedlands
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [8]
0
0
4102 - Woolloongabba
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Innsbruck
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
Salzburg
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
Vienna
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
Belarus
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Gomel
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
Belarus
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Minsk
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Brugge
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Brussels
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Leuven
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Liege
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
Brno
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
Hradec Kralove
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Olomouc
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
Czech Republic
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Prague
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
Denmark
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Aalborg
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
Denmark
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Vejle
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Caen
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Limoges Cedex 1
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Montpellier Cedex 5
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Paris
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Toulouse cedex 9
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
Georgia
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
Tbilisi
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Berlin
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Dresden
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Freiburg
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Greifswald
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Heidelberg
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Leipzig
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Münster
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Tübingen
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Ulm
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Würzburg
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Greece
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
Athens
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Ireland
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Dublin
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Ireland
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Tullamore / Co Offally
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Haifa
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Jerusalem
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Petch Tikva
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Israel
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
Tel Hashomer
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
Bologna
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Genova
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Milano
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Pavia 2
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Rome
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
San Giovanni Rotondo (FG)
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Turin
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
Netherlands
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
Amsterdam
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
Netherlands
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
Rotterdam
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
Netherlands
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Utrecht
Query!
Country [49]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [49]
0
0
Bialystok
Query!
Country [50]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [50]
0
0
Gdansk
Query!
Country [51]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [51]
0
0
Krakow
Query!
Country [52]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [52]
0
0
Lodz
Query!
Country [53]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [53]
0
0
Lublin
Query!
Country [54]
0
0
Poland
Query!
State/province [54]
0
0
Warsaw
Query!
Country [55]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [55]
0
0
Moscow
Query!
Country [56]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [56]
0
0
Novosibirsk
Query!
Country [57]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [57]
0
0
Obninsk
Query!
Country [58]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [58]
0
0
Samara
Query!
Country [59]
0
0
Russian Federation
Query!
State/province [59]
0
0
St. Petersburg
Query!
Country [60]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [60]
0
0
Barcelona
Query!
Country [61]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [61]
0
0
Cadiz
Query!
Country [62]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [62]
0
0
Madrid
Query!
Country [63]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [63]
0
0
Salamanca
Query!
Country [64]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [64]
0
0
Sevilla
Query!
Country [65]
0
0
Sweden
Query!
State/province [65]
0
0
Boras
Query!
Country [66]
0
0
Sweden
Query!
State/province [66]
0
0
Malmö
Query!
Country [67]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [67]
0
0
Zurich
Query!
Country [68]
0
0
Turkey
Query!
State/province [68]
0
0
Ankara
Query!
Country [69]
0
0
Turkey
Query!
State/province [69]
0
0
Istanbul
Query!
Country [70]
0
0
Turkey
Query!
State/province [70]
0
0
Izmir
Query!
Country [71]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [71]
0
0
Cherkassy
Query!
Country [72]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [72]
0
0
Dnepropetrovsk
Query!
Country [73]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [73]
0
0
Donetsk
Query!
Country [74]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [74]
0
0
Kiev
Query!
Country [75]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [75]
0
0
Lviv 79044
Query!
Country [76]
0
0
Ukraine
Query!
State/province [76]
0
0
Zhitomir
Query!
Country [77]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [77]
0
0
Aidrie
Query!
Country [78]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [78]
0
0
Leeds
Query!
Country [79]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [79]
0
0
London
Query!
Country [80]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [80]
0
0
Manchester
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/industry
Query!
Name
Celgene Corporation
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to determine whether lenalidomide is safe and effective in the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma who are 65 years of age or older.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00405756
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Dimopoulos MA, Delforge M, Hajek R, Kropff M, Petrucci MT, Lewis P, Nixon A, Zhang J, Mei J, Palumbo A. Lenalidomide, melphalan, and prednisone, followed by lenalidomide maintenance, improves health-related quality of life in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients aged 65 years or older: results of a randomized phase III trial. Haematologica. 2013 May;98(5):784-8. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2012.074534. Epub 2012 Dec 14. Palumbo A, Hajek R, Delforge M, Kropff M, Petrucci MT, Catalano J, Gisslinger H, Wiktor-Jedrzejczak W, Zodelava M, Weisel K, Cascavilla N, Iosava G, Cavo M, Kloczko J, Blade J, Beksac M, Spicka I, Plesner T, Radke J, Langer C, Ben Yehuda D, Corso A, Herbein L, Yu Z, Mei J, Jacques C, Dimopoulos MA; MM-015 Investigators. Continuous lenalidomide treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2012 May 10;366(19):1759-69. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1112704. Erratum In: N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 19;367(3):285. Dimopoulos MA, Petrucci MT, Foa R, Catalano J, Kropff M, Terpos E, Zhang J, Grote L, Jacques C, Palumbo A; MM-015 Investigators. Impact of maintenance therapy on subsequent treatment in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: use of "progression-free survival 2" as a clinical trial end-point. Haematologica. 2015 Aug;100(8):e328-30. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2014.120790. Epub 2015 Apr 3. No abstract available.
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Antonio Palumbo, M.D.
Query!
Address
0
0
Azienda Sanitaria Ospedaliera Molinette S. Giovanni Battista
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
0
0
Query!
Address
0
0
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
No information has been provided regarding IPD availability
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Results publications and other study-related documents
Type
Citations or Other Details
Journal
Dimopoulos MA, Delforge M, Hajek R, Kropff M, Petr...
[
More Details
]
Journal
Palumbo A, Hajek R, Delforge M, Kropff M, Petrucci...
[
More Details
]
Results are available at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT00405756
Download to PDF