MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2234721586 · doi:10.1182/blood.v122.21.2939.2939

Pomalidomide (POM) Plus Low-Dose Dexamethasone (LoDEX) Improves Health-Related Quality Of Life (HRQoL) Vs High-Dose Dexamethasone (HiDEX) In Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Patients Enrolled In MM-003 Phase 3 Randomized Trial

2013· article· en· W2234721586 sur OpenAlexaff
Kevin Song, Meletios Α. Dimopoulos, Katja Weisel, Michel Delforge, Lionel Karlin, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Philippe Moreau, Anne Banos, Albert Oriol, Andrew Spencer, Stefan Knop, Christoph Renner, Nizar J. Bahlis, Ramesh Amatya, Xin Yu, Mara Silvia Monzini, Lars Sternås, Mohamed H. Zaki, Christian Jacques, Jesús F. San Miguel

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Établissements canadiensUniversity of CalgaryVancouver General Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicinePomalidomideLenalidomideMultiple myelomaInternal medicineDexamethasoneQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialSurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Pronounced symptoms, poor prognosis, and therapy exhaustion each affect HRQoL in RRMM patients. The MM-003, randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 3 trial reported that POM + LoDEX significantly extended median progression-free and overall survival vs HiDEX in RRMM patients who exhausted bortezomib (BORT) and lenalidomide (LEN), and progressed on their last treatment (San Miguel, EHA, 2013). Improved survival outcomes, treatment-related toxicity, and aging populations have placed an emphasis on HRQoL in RRMM. MM-003 is the first study to investigate HRQoL in RRMM patients treated with POM + LoDEX. Methods Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 28-day cycles (C) of POM 4 mg D1-21 + LoDEX 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged > 75 years) weekly or HiDEX 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged > 75 years) D1-4, 9-12, and 17-20 until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. HiDEX was chosen as the comparator to isolate the effects of POM as at the time of trial design, it was the standard salvage therapy for heavily pretreated patients. Time to meaningful worsening in HRQoL was analyzed for 5 predefined EORTC QLQ-C30 domains (Global Health Status, Physical Functioning, Fatigue, Emotional Functioning, and Pain) using the Kaplan-Meier method. A meaningful worsening was defined as a reduction in HRQoL equal to or greater than the domain-specific minimally important difference, calculated using the standard error of measurement. HRQoL was also evaluated cross-sectionally and longitudinally through a mixed effect model. Data from the September 7, 2012 data cut are presented below. Results 455 patients were randomized to POM + LoDEX (n = 302) or HiDEX (n = 153). 448 patients completed at least 1 QLQ-C30 questionnaire and were included in the HRQoL analysis. The median number of prior treatments was 5 (range, 2-17), and 82% were refractory to LEN and BORT. Median follow-up was 4.2 months. Analyses on time to clinically meaningful worsening showed that POM + LoDEX extended median time to meaningful worsening vs HiDEX for all the preselected domains (Table): Global Health Status (114 vs 85 days, P = .06), Physical Functioning (174 vs 106 days; P = .09), Fatigue (113 vs 60 days; P = .04), Emotional Functioning (190 vs 124 days; P = .02), and Pain (147 vs 113 days; P = .2). In the cross-sectional analysis, HRQoL scores were relatively better for POM + LoDEX vs HiDEX for all domains at every cycle. Statistically or marginally significant (P < .10) treatment differences were observed for Global Health Status (C2 and 4), Physical Functioning (C2, 3, and 4), Emotional Functioning (C3), and Fatigue (C2) domains. No statistically significant deteriorations from baseline were observed in the mean scores for the POM + LoDEX arm for any of the 5 domains at any treatment cycle. Such deteriorations were observed with HiDEX. These results were supported by a mixed effect model analysis. Data from the March 1, 2013 data cut will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions In heavily pretreated patients who exhausted BORT and LEN, POM + LoDEX resulted in better clinical outcomes and favorable HRQoL vs patients treated with HiDEX. POM + LoDEX should become a standard of care in relapsing patients as it has been proven to prolong and enhance the lives of RRMM patients. Disclosures: Song: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: POM is approved in the US but not in Europe. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Weisel:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Delforge:Celgene: Honoraria. Karlin:Celgene: Export board committee Other, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Oriol:Celgene: Consultancy. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knop:Celgene: Honoraria. Renner:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Travel support Other. Bahlis:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Amatya:Celgene: Consultancy. Yu:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Monzini:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sternas:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. San Miguel:Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,031
Tête enseignante GPT0,319
Écart entre enseignants0,288 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207