MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2549580878 · doi:10.1182/blood.v126.23.28.28

Eloquent-2 Update: A Phase 3, Randomized, Open-Label Study of Elotuzumab in Combination with Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma - 3-Year Safety and Efficacy Follow-up

2015· article· en· W2549580878 sur OpenAlexaff
Meletios Α. Dimopoulos, Sagar Lonial, Darrell White, Philippe Moreau, Antonio Palumbo, Jesús F. San Miguel, Ofer Shpilberg, Kenneth C. Anderson, Sebastian Grosicki, Ivan Špıčka, Adam Walter‐Croneck, Hila Magen‐Nativ, María‐Victoria Mateos, Andrew R. Belch, Donna Reece, Meral Beksaç, Eric Bleickhardt, Valerie Poulart, Jessica Katz, Anil Singhal, Paul G. Richardson

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Établissements canadiensUniversity of AlbertaPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreDalhousie University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLenalidomideDexamethasoneMedicineMultiple myelomaRefractory (planetary science)OncologyInternal medicinePhases of clinical researchDaratumumabClinical trialBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Elotuzumab is an immunostimulatory monoclonal antibody (mAb) that recognizes Signaling Lymphocytic Activation Molecule F7 (SLAMF7), a protein highly expressed by myeloma and natural killer cells. Elotuzumab has a dual mechanism of action, directly activating natural killer cells and initiating antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity targeted against myeloma cells, with minimal effect on normal tissues. In the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) interim analysis of ELOQUENT-2, a Phase 3 study (NCT01239797) comparing elotuzumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (ELd) with lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Ld), ELd resulted in a significant 30% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death vs Ld (hazard ratio 0.70 [95% CI 0.57, 0.85]; p=0.0004). Overall response rate (ORR) was 79% (95% CI 74, 83) in the ELd arm vs 66% (95% CI 60, 71) in the Ld arm (p=0.0002). Furthermore, the addition of elotuzumab to Ld was well tolerated, with minimal added toxicity.1 Elotuzumab's immunotherapeutic effect induces effective therapeutic outcomes and represents an important approach to treating multiple myeloma (MM). Here we present extended 3-year follow-up data. Methods: As previously described,1 patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) and 1-3 prior therapies were randomized 1:1 to ELd or Ld in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints were PFS and ORR. Secondary and other endpoints included overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life. Post hoc analyses assessed Worst Pain using the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF); data were collected at screening, on Day 1 of each 28-day cycle, and at the end of treatment. Sustained improvement in pain was defined by a decrease of ≥3 points for ≥2 consecutive treatment cycles. Results: In total, 646 RRMM pts were randomized (321 to ELd, 325 to Ld). Baseline demographic factors included: median age 66 years (20% ≥75 years old); 32% of pts had del17p and 10% had t(4;14); median prior number of therapies was 2; and 35% of pts were refractory to their last therapy. At data cut-off (16 May 2015), 29% of pts treated with ELd vs 15% of pts treated with Ld remained on study therapy; discontinuation was mainly due to disease progression (46% in ELd arm, 51% in Ld arm). Grade 3-4 adverse events in ≥15% of pts included lymphopenia (78% in ELd arm, 49% in Ld arm), neutropenia (35% in ELd arm, 44% in Ld arm), anemia (20% in ELd arm, 21% in Ld arm), and thrombocytopenia (21% in ELd arm, 20% in Ld arm). Infections (any grade) occurred in 83% of pts in the ELd arm and 75% in the Ld arm. Exposure-adjusted infection rates (incidence rate/100 person-years of exposure) were 196 and 193 in the ELd and Ld arms, respectively. Infusion reactions (mostly Grade 1-2) occurred in 11% of pts treated with ELd. In total, there were 263 deaths during treatment follow-up (123 [47%] in ELd arm, 140 [53%] in Ld arm); 62% of the required 427 deaths for the OS final analysis. With regard to patient-reported pain (BPI-SF), sustained improvement in Worst Pain was observed in pts with ORR, with more pts demonstrating sustained improvement in the ELd arm (n=74) vs the Ld arm (n=56). 3-year PFS and the interim analysis of OS will be presented. Conclusions: Elotuzumab is the first immunostimulatory mAb for the treatment of MM to demonstrate a statistically significant and clinically relevant improvement in efficacy with minimal added toxicity.1 The addition of elotuzumab to Ld led to an effective and durable benefit, representing a novel approach to treating MM. The updated safety and tolerability data reported were consistent with previous findings, confirming that there are minimal incremental toxicities associated with the addition of elotuzumab. A greater proportion of ELd pts vs Ld pts with an ORR had improvement in BPI-SF Worst Pain. Three-year PFS data and the interim analysis of OS will be presented, providing insight into the long-term benefits of ELd therapy. Reference: 1. Lonial S et al. N Engl J Med 2015; Jun 2 [Epub ahead of print]. Study funding: Study funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and AbbVie Biotherapeutics. Writing assistance was provided by S Addison, PhD, at Caudex and funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Genesis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Elotuzumab is an investigational agent being studied for the treatment of multiple myeloma. . Lonial:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. White:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Moreau:Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo:Array BioPharma: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. San Miguel:Novartis: Honoraria; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria. Shpilberg:Millennium Takeda: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Spicka:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Mateos:Onyx: Consultancy; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Reece:Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding. Beksac:Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Bleickhardt:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Poulart:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Katz:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Singhal:Abbvie: Employment. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: 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)0,003
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 seuil0,018

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,003
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

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 Opus0,032
Tête enseignante GPT0,310
Écart entre enseignants0,278 · 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

Citations28
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207