Phase I-II Trial of Oral Cyclophosphamide, Prednisone and Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) (CPR) for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Abstract 3055 Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) and dexamethasone is an effective regimen for relapsed/refractory (rel/ref) multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts) with an overall response rate of 60% and median time to progression of 13.4 months (Dimopoulos ME, et al. Leukemia 2009; 23: 2147-52). We combined lenalidomide with the alkylating agent combination of cyclophosphamide and prednisone—an older regimen with minimal cumulative myelosuppression and good activity as second or third line therapy (Trieu Y, et al, Mayo Clin Proc 2005; 80: 1582). The CPR regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide (CY) on days 1, 8, and 15, lenalidomide on days 1–21 and prednisone 100 mg q 2 days in a 28-day cycle. ASA 81 mg/day was given as DVT prophylaxis. Three dose levels were evaluated using a 3 × 3 dose escalation design. Thirty-two pts were entered between 11/2007-06/2009; median age was 64 (42-80) yrs, 60% were male, and immunoglobulin isotype was IgG in 19 (62%), IgA in 8 (25%) and light chain in 4 (13%) pts. Median β2-microglobulin level was 257 (92-767) nm/L, albumin 39 (34-48) g/L, creatinine 83 (50-126) μmol/L, platelet count 355 (75-479) × 109/L and ANC 2.5 (1.1-6.1) × 109/L. The median number of prior regimens was 2 (1-5). Prior therapy included: ASCT (single in 91%; double in 19%), thalidomide (28%) and bortezomib (50%). FISH cytogenetics were available in 13 pts; 1 had del 13q but none had t(4;14) or del p53. Table 1 summarizes protocol treatment delivered. Table 1. Dose level N Cyclophosphamide dose (mg/m2) Lenalidomide dose (mg) Prednisone dose (mg) Median # cycles given 1 3 150 15 100 12 (12–34+) 2 3 150 25 100 10 (9–23) 3 26 300 25 100 17 (5–28+) 1–3 (All) 32 150–300 15–25 100 19 (5–34+) Dose limiting toxicity was not observed during cycle 1 at any dose level. Grade 3–4 toxicities during the trial included: thrombocytopenia in 7 (22%) and neutropenia in 9 (29%), managed with dose reduction and/or growth factors; five episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred, all at dose level 3. In cohort 3, other grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicities included 1 episode each of abdominal pain/bacteremia, hypokalemia, fatigue, sick sinus syndrome, cardiac amyloidosis, perforated diverticulum and 2 episodes of DVT. Two heavily pretreated pts developed 2° MDS, including 1 previously treated for lymphoma, 43 and 190 mos after the diagnosis of MM. The best response using modified EBMT criteria was documented at a median of 7 (1-26) cycles and included the following: dose level 1 (1 CR, 2 PR); dose level 2 (1 VGPR, 2 PR); dose level 3 (4 CR, 14 VGPR, 11 PR, 1 MR and 1 stable disease). At a median F/U of 16 (5-34) months, 13 pts remain on study and 18 have progressed at a median of 10 (2-23) mos; 1 was lost to F/U and 9 have died of progressive MM. The 1-year actuarial OS and PFS rates are 93% (95% CI 76–98%) and 78% (95% CI 60–89%), respectively. We conclude: 1) the combination of full doses of the agents in CPR can be given in a 28 day cycle with an acceptable safety profile; 2) the objective response rate (CR + PR + MR) in all 32 pts to date is 94%; 3) the 1-year OS of 93% and PFS of 78% compare favorably with other 3-drug combinations in rel/ref MM pts; 4) further evaluation of this regimen in newly diagnosed pts would be of interest. Disclosures: Reece: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Combination of lenalidomide and cyclophosphamide and prednisone in relapsed and refractory myeloma patients. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kukreti:Celgene: 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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».