MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2955312833 · doi:10.1182/blood.v130.suppl_1.3107.3107

Safety and Efficacy of Daratumumab Monotherapy in Patients with Heavily Pretreated Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Final Results from GEN501 and Sirius

2017· article· en· W2955312833 sur OpenAlexaff
Saad Z. Usmani, Hareth Nahi, Brendan M. Weiss, Nizar J. Bahlis, Andrew Belch, Henk M. Lokhorst, Peter M. Voorhees, Paul G. Richardson, Clarissa Uhlar, Jianping Wang, Ming Qi, Sagar Lonial

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDaratumumabMedicineInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Phases of clinical researchProteasome inhibitorGastroenterologyMultiple myelomaLenalidomideOncologySurgeryClinical trial

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Daratumumab (DARA) is a CD38-targeting IgGκ monoclonal antibody with antimyeloma activity mediated by both on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action. In two clinical studies (NCT00574288 [GEN501] and NCT01985126 [SIRIUS]), DARA monotherapy induced rapid, deep, and durable responses with a favorable safety profile in patients with heavily treated, relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (Lokhorst HM. N Engl J Med 2015;373[13]:1207-1219. Lonial S. Lancet 2016;387[10027]:1551-1560). A combined analysis of patients who received 16 mg/kg DARA in these studies at a median follow-up of 20.7 months was reported previously (Usmani SZ. Blood 2016;128[1]:37-44). Here, we present the final safety and efficacy findings for these patients after median follow-up of approximately 3 years. Methods: GEN501 was a first-in-human, open-label, phase 1/2 study comprising a dose-escalation phase (Part 1) and a dose-expansion phase (Part 2). The study enrolled patients with MM that had relapsed after or was refractory to ≥2 prior therapies. In Part 2, patients received an initial infusion of 16 mg/kg DARA, which was followed by a 3-week rest period and then by DARA infusions once weekly (QW) for 7 weeks, once every 2 weeks (Q2W) for 14 weeks, and once every 4 weeks (Q4W) thereafter. SIRIUS was an open-label phase 2 study of DARA in patients with MM who had received ≥3 prior therapies, including a proteasome inhibitor (PI) or immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), or who were double refractory to a PI and an IMiD. Patients (n = 106) received 16 mg/kg DARA IV QW for 8 weeks, Q2W for 16 weeks, and Q4W thereafter. Patients treated with 16 mg/kg DARA in GEN501 Part 2 and in SIRIUS were included in this combined analysis. Overall response rate (ORR) was calculated based on computerized algorithm results from both studies. Results : The combined analysis included 148 patients (42 from GEN501 Part 2 and 106 from SIRIUS) who were treated with 16 mg/kg DARA. Seventy-six percent of patients had received >3 prior therapies. Ninety-one percent of patients were refractory to their last line of therapy, and 87% were refractory to both a PI and an IMiD. In the combined analysis set, the median duration of follow-up was 36.6 (range 0.5-42.3) months. The most common (≥20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) observed across the 2 studies were unchanged from previous reports: fatigue (42%), nausea (30%), anemia (28%), back pain (27%), cough (26%), upper respiratory tract infection (22%), neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (21%), pyrexia (20%), and nasal congestion (20%). The most common (≥5%) grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were anemia (18%), thrombocytopenia (14%), neutropenia (10%), and hypertension (5%). Infusion-related reactions were observed in 71 (48%) patients and predominantly occurred during the first infusion. ORR was 30.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.1-38.5), with 20 (13.5%) patients achieving VGPR or better and 7 (4.7%) achieving CR or better (Table). In both studies, deep responses were maintained over time. Among responders, the median duration of response was 8.0 months (95% CI 6.5-14.7), and 19.6% (95% CI 9.0-33.2) of responders remained progression free at 3 years. Median overall survival (OS) was 20.5 months (95% CI 16.6-28.1, Figure), and the 3-year OS rate was 36.5% (95% CI 28.4-44.6). Case reports of patients with prolonged, ongoing responses will be described. Conclusions: After 3 years of median follow-up, single-agent DARA continues to demonstrate a favorable safety profile with no new safety signals. Deep and durable responses continue to be maintained in a subset of these heavily pretreated patients. With over one-third of patients remaining alive after 3 years of study entry, these findings highlight the activity of single-agent DARA in this heavily pretreated population. Disclosures Usmani: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Weiss: Janssen: Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Prothena: Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria. Bahlis: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Belch: Amgen, Celgene, Takeda: Honoraria. Lokhorst: OncoImmune: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genmab: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Voorhees: Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Richardson: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides AB: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Uhlar: Janssen: Employment. Wang: Janssen: Employment. Qi: Janssen: Employment; Johnson & Johnson, LLC: Equity Ownership.

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 non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,010

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

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

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 Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,269
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 non 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
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207