P907: EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF ELRANATAMAB IN HIGH-RISK PATIENTS WITH RELAPSED/REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMA: A SUBGROUP ANALYSIS FROM MAGNETISMM-3
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Topic: 14. Myeloma and other monoclonal gammopathies - Clinical Background: Data from the ongoing phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 (NCT04649359) study demonstrated the efficacy and safety of elranatamab in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) and no prior BCMA-directed therapy (Cohort A). Aims: To report the efficacy and safety of elranatamab in high-risk subgroups in BCMA-naïve patients from MagnetisMM-3. Methods: Eligibility criteria, dosing and administration were previously reported (Bahlis, ASH 2022). Subgroups analyzed were Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) stage (I/II/III), cytogenetic abnormalities (standard/high risk [high-risk defined by the presence of t(4;14), t(14;16) or del(17p)]), extramedullary disease (EMD) at baseline (Y/N), bone marrow plasma cell involvement (BMPC) at baseline (<50%/≥50%), and penta-refractory disease (Y/N). Results include data up through ~12 months after last patient initial dose. Results: Median treatment durations and the proportions of patients receiving treatment at the data cut-off were lower for all high-risk subgroups than the corresponding lower-risk subgroups (Table). The most frequent cause of discontinuation was progressive disease which was higher for all high-risk subgroups than the corresponding lower risk subgroups. A clinical benefit, assessed by the objective response rate (ORR), was observed across subgroups (Table). A multivariable logistic regression analysis for ORR including baseline age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, sex, region, cytogenetic risk, presence of EMD, BMPC involvement, prior stem cell transplant, R-ISS stage, number of prior lines, type of myeloma, and penta-refractory disease showed presence of EMD at baseline and non-IgG myeloma (vs IgG) as predictive of lower ORR. Light chain-only myeloma (vs IgG) was predictive of higher ORR. Median duration of response (DOR) was not reached in subgroups by 12 months, DOR rate at 12 months is reported in the Table. Any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 100% of patients in the study. The incidence of grade 3/4 TEAEs was overall similar across subgroups (Table). Summary/Conclusion: Elranatamab is efficacious and has a manageable safety profile in patients with high-risk RRMM and no prior BCMA-directed therapy. Table - R-ISS stage I R-ISS stage II R-ISS stage III Standard cytogenetic risk High cytogenetic risk (n=28) (n=68) (n=19) (n=83) (n=31) Median treatment duration (mo) 10.7 5.7 1.4 7.9 2.6 Receiving treatment at data cut-off (%) 42.9 38.2 5.3 41.0 19.4 ORR (%, 95% CI) 75.0 63.2 26.3 63.9 54.8 (55.1, 89.3) (50.7, 74.6) (9.1, 51.2) (52.6, 74.1) (36.0, 72.7) DOR rate at 12 mo (%, 95% CI) 76.2 78.8 53.3 79.4 57.0 (45.4, 91.0) (61.8, 88.8) (6.8, 86.3) (63.4, 89.0) (27.4, 78.3) Grade 3/4 TEAEs (%) 75.0 73.5 63.2 73.5 64.5 - EMD – N EMD – Y <50% BMPC ≥50% BMPC Penta-refractory disease – N Penta-refractory disease - Y (n=84) (n=39) (n=89) (n=26) (n=71) (n=52) Median treatment duration (mo) 8.4 2.2 8.2 3.0 10.0 2.3 Receiving treatment at data cut-off (%) 38.1 25.6 38.2 26.9 42.3 23.1 ORR (%, 95% CI) 71.4 38.5 67.4 46.2 71.8 46.2 (60.5, 80.8) (23.4, 55.4) (56.7, 77.0) (26.6, 66.6) (59.9, 81.9) (32.2, 60.5) DOR rate at 12 mo (%, 95% CI) 73.8 73.4 72.0 81.5 74.7 71.9 (58.3, 84.3) (37.4, 90.8) (56.6, 82.7) (43.5, 95.1) (58.6, 85.3) (41.2, 88.4) Grade 3/4 TEAEs (%) 77.4 56.4 73.0 69.2 73.2 67.3 Keywords: Myeloma, Bispecific, Multiple myeloma, Clinical trial
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».