MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2556974834 · doi:10.1182/blood.v118.21.303.303

A Phase 2 Study of Elotuzumab in Combination with Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

2011· article· en· W2556974834 sur OpenAlexaff
Sagar Lonial, Andrzej Jakubowiak, Sundar Jagannath, Marc S. Raab, Thierry Façon, Ravi Vij, Philippe Moreau, Donna Reece, Darrell White, Lotfi Benboubker, Jeffrey A. Zonder, Jean‐François Rossi, Claire Tsao, Teresa Parli, Glenn S. Kroog, Anil Singhal, Paul G. Richardson

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Établissements canadiensQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentrePrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLenalidomideDexamethasoneMedicineRegimenMultiple myelomaPremedicationInternal medicinePhases of clinical researchPharmacologyGastroenterologyChemotherapySurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 303 Introduction: Elotuzumab is a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody directed against the cell surface glycoprotein CS1, which is highly expressed on tumor cells from >95% of multiple myeloma (MM) patients. The mechanism of action of elotuzumab is primarily natural killer cell-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against myeloma cells. A Phase 1 study of elotuzumab (at doses of 5, 10, and 20 mg/kg) in combination with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (N=28) in relapsed/refractory MM patients demonstrated an 82% objective response rate (ORR). Median PFS was not yet reached after a median of 16.4 months follow-up in patients who were treated until progression (only the 20 mg/kg cohort). Of the 13 Phase 1 patients without premedication, 12 (92%) experienced infusion reactions (IR), including 2 with Grade 3/4 IR adverse events (AE). Phase 3 trials of lenalidomide/dexamethasone with or without elotuzumab are ongoing. Methods: In the ongoing Phase 2 study, patients with relapsed/refractory MM and 1 to 3 prior therapies were randomized to elotuzumab 10 or 20 mg/kg IV (days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 28 days in the first 2 cycles and days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles), lenalidomide 25 mg PO (days 1–21) and dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly or 28 mg PO plus 8 mg IV on elotuzumab dosing days. Patients treated with prior lenalidomide were excluded. All patients received a premedication regimen, which consisted of either methylprednisolone (50 mg IV) or in a later amendment dexamethasone (8 mg IV), diphenhydramine (25–50 mg PO or IV) or equivalent, ranitidine (50 mg IV) or equivalent, and acetaminophen (650–1000 mg PO). Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to assess efficacy (ORR; 'partial response [PR]) according to the International Myeloma Working Group criteria. The incidence of IRs were analyzed by 1) AEs, regardless of investigator attribution, and that potentially could be an IR by virtue of their onset on the day of, or day after, elotuzumab infusion, and 2) investigator attribution of an AE as an IR. Results: Among 73 enrolled and treated patients (median age 63 years; range 39–82), 55% had ≥2 prior therapies, 62% received prior thalidomide, 60% received prior bortezomib, and 47% had β2 microglobulin ≥3.5 mg/L at screening (N=71). ORR was 82% in the combined treatment group (10 mg/kg, n=36; 20 mg/kg, n=37), including 44% ≥ very good PR (VGPR). Of these patients, 12% had a stringent complete response (CR) or a CR, and 32% had a VGPR. In the 10 mg/kg group (Phase 3 dose), the ORR was 92%. ORRs for patients who received 10 mg/kg by subgroup were: 1 prior therapy (n=16), 100%; ≥2 prior therapies (n=20), 85%; prior thalidomide (n=21), 91%; prior bortezomib (n=22), 86%. Median time to objective response was 1.0 months (range, 0.7–4.3). After a median follow-up of 11.4 months, 22% of patients had progressed in the 10 mg/kg group and 30% of patients in the 20 mg/kg group. For all treated patients, the most common Grade 3/4 treatment-emergent AEs were lymphopenia (16%), thrombocytopenia (16%), neutropenia (15%), and anemia (11%). Forty-six patients (63%) experienced a study sponsor-defined IR (all grades).The most common IR AEs (mostly Grade 1/2; 1 Grade 3 nausea) were nausea (18%), headache (14%), pyrexia (14%), and dizziness (12%). Among the pre-specified IR AEs, Grade 3 rash and Grade 3 nausea were identified in 2 patients, respectively. However, the incidence of investigator-identified IR AEs was 16% (all grades) including the Grade 3 rash. No Grade 4 or 5 IR AEs were reported. Of the 73 patients, 40 patients are still on treatment. Conclusions: Elotuzumab 10 mg/kg in combination with lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone was generally well tolerated and exhibited a 92% ORR in relapsed/refractory MM patients; 10 mg/kg is the Phase 3 dose. Twenty-two percent of patients progressed after a median of 11.4 months follow-up. Elotuzumab-associated AEs were primarily Grade 1 and 2 infusion-related reactions, with the incidence and severity mitigated by the defined premedication regimen. Phase 3 clinical trials of this combination are ongoing in relapsed/refractory MM (ELOQUENT2; CA204-004) and front-line MM (ELOQUENT1; CA204-006); the latter is based on the Phase 2 study ORR of 100% in patients who had received only 1 prior therapy. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Lonial: Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Elotuzumab. Jakubowiak:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Facon:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Washington University School of Medicine: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Multiple Myeloma Consortium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Reece:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Princess Margaret Hospital: Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson&Johnson: Research Funding. White:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Zonder:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Medtronics: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy. Rossi:Pierre Fabre Medicaments: Consultancy; LFB: Consultancy. Tsao:Abbott Biotherapeutics Corp.: Employment. Parli:Abbott Biotherapeutics: Employment. Kroog:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Singhal:Abbott: Employment. Richardson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: 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.

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 seuil0,012

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,004
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 Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,273
Écart entre enseignants0,249 · 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

Citations12
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207