MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2558398014 · doi:10.1182/blood.v118.21.5136.5136

CYBOR-D Induction Therapy In Clinical Practice

2011· article· en· W2558398014 sur OpenAlexaff
Christine Chen, Esther Masih‐Khan, Víctor H. Jiménez‐Zepeda, Donna Reece, Suzanne Trudel, Rodger E. Tiedemann, Vishal Kukreti

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineRegimenInternal medicineBortezomibSurgeryMaintenance therapyClinical trialCyclophosphamideMultiple myelomaChemotherapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 5136 Introduction: CyBorD is a highly active three-drug induction regimen for multiple myeloma (MM) patients preparing for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). In initial phase 2 testing, CyBorD (bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 on days 1,4,8,11, weekly cyclophosphamide 300mg/m2 orally days 1,8,15,22, and dexamethasone 40mg orally days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20, given for four 28-day cycles) achieved an overall response rate (ORR) of 88% (≥VGPR 61%)(Reeder et al. Leukemia 2009). In an expanded cohort (30 patients) of the original phase 2 trial, a modified dosing schedule using a higher bortezomib dose of 1.5mg/m2 but given only weekly (days 1,8,15,22) and DEX 40mg dropped to once weekly (days 1,8,15,22) for cycles 3 and 4, demonstrated similar responses to the twice weekly cohort (ORR 93%, ≥VGPR 60%) with less toxicity (Reeder et al. Blood 2010). Based on these promising study results, our institution adopted the weekly CyBorD regimen as our standard induction regimen. Given that clinical trial efficacy can significantly overestimate real-life effectiveness of a treatment regimen, we reviewed our institutional clinical practice with CyBorD in a non-clinical trial setting. Methods: As a referral transplant center, Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) performs over 100 ASCTs per year, but most patients receive their induction therapy at community institutions. From April 2007-July 2010, 55 MM patients who received CyBorD induction therapy at our institution were reviewed. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and details of induction therapy and ASCT were obtained from retrospective chart and transplant database review. Statistical analyses of survival outcomes were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. To obtain additional CyBorD experience from community institutions, an on-line survey of referring physicians was performed. Results: Fifty-five MM patients receiving weekly CyBorD induction in preparation for ASCT were reviewed. Median age was 58 years (range 36–71); 32 male (58%); 6 patients with high-risk FISH cytogenetics [3 with t(4;14), 3 with del17p]. MM subtypes included: IgG 40%, IgA 16%, light chains only 33%, and other 11%. A median of 4 cycles of CyBorD (range 1–10) were administered. Response rates after induction, before ASCT, were comparable to phase 2 data with an overall response of 91% (3VGPR 65%). Although responses were rapid in onset, the median number of cycles required to achieve best response was 4 (range 1–10). Dose delays or reductions of any agents were required in 10 patients (18%): 5.4% of cyclophophosphamide, 11% bortezomib, 9% dexamethasone. Grade 3–4 toxicities were reported in 13 patients (24%). Grade 3–4 neutropenia and/or thrombocytopenia were uncommon (7 and 2%, respectively) and no grade 3–4 peripheral neuropathy was seen. The median number of stem cells collected was 10.3 × 106/kg over a median of one day (range 1–5) of leukapheresis. All patients, except 4, proceeded to ASCT after CyBorD induction with a median PFS 21 months, OS not reached, at a median follow-up 31.5 mos. On-line survey responses were obtained from 20 physicians at 11 referring institutions describing their experience with CyBorD. Induction regimens used by the surveyed sites included: CyBorD 90%, biweekly bortezomib plus dexamethasone 35%, high-dose dexamethasone alone 10%, and other 5%. Weekly CyBorD was ranked highly for convenience, ease of administration and patient tolerance, but restricted bortezomib drug access was cited as the main cause for delay in initiating therapy. Conclusions: Weekly CyBorD as induction therapy prior to ASCT is highly effective in the non-clinical trial setting, with similar response and toxicity profiles to phase 2 trial data. CyBorD does not appear to impair stem cell mobilization. Given its high activity and excellent toxicity profile, CyBorD has been adopted widely in our community referral base and remains our institutional induction standard. Disclosures: Chen: Ortho: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jimenez-Zepeda:Ortho: Honoraria. Reece:Bristol, Meyers, Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson&Johnson: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Trudel:Ortho: Honoraria. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria.

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)0,011
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,017
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,061

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0110,018
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0170,005

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 Opus0,161
Tête enseignante GPT0,421
Écart entre enseignants0,261 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations1
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→Travaux en français237 207→