Patients with Relapsed/Refractory multiple myeloma who achieved sustained minimal residual disease negativity in the dreamm-7 trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: In the phase 3 DREAMM-7 trial (NCT04246047), belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (BVd) demonstrated significant progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefits vs daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (DVd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who had received ≥1 prior line of therapy (LOT). Minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity has been shown to be a predictor of PFS and OS in multiple myeloma. The first interim analysis of the DREAMM-7 trial (data cutoff: October 2, 2023) showed that patients in the BVd arm had a significantly higher rate of complete response (CR)–based MRD negativity vs those in the DVd arm. MRD was declared statistically significant at the second interim analysis (data cutoff: October 7, 2024) due to the prespecified testing hierarchy. The purpose of the current analysis was to evaluate the number of patients who achieved sustained MRD negativity for ≥12 months in the DREAMM-7 trial and to describe their demographics and baseline disease characteristics. Methods: As previously reported, patients treated with ≥1 prior LOT were randomized (1:1) to BVd or DVd in DREAMM-7. The primary endpoint was independent review committee–assessed PFS. OS and MRD negativity at achievement of ≥ CR were key secondary endpoints. Patients achieving ≥ CR were tested for MRD negativity by next-generation sequencing with 10−5 sensitivity and 10−6 sensitivity (exploratory analysis). Results: At data cutoff (October 7, 2024), CR–based MRD negativity rates in pts with ≥ CR were 70% (61/87) vs 59% (26/44) in the BVd vs DVd arms, respectively, at the 10−5 sensitivity threshold; rates in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population were 25% (95% CI, 19.8%-31.0%) vs 10% (95% CI, 6.9%-14.8%). At the 10−6 sensitivity threshold, rates in patients with ≥ CR were 45% (39/87) vs 23% (10/44) in the BVd vs DVd arms, respectively; rates in the ITT population were 16% (95% CI, 11.7%-21.3%) vs 4% (95% CI, 1.9%-7.2%). Median time to first CR–based MRD negativity was 11.14 months in the BVd arm vs 17.02 months in the DVd arm. Sustained ≥ CR MRD negativity was observed for ≥12 months in 57% (35/61) of patients who reached MRD negative status in the BVd arm vs 42% (11/26) of patients in the DVd arm. In patients who had sustained MRD negativity for ≥12 months, age was balanced between treatment arms. All patients had Revised International Staging System stages of I or II at screening. The DVd arm had a greater proportion of patients with 1 prior LOT (91%) vs the BVd arm (63%); the remaining patients in both arms received ≥2 prior LOTs. The proportion of patients with high-risk cytogenetics was greater in the BVd arm (40%) vs the DVd arm (27%). Conclusions: BVd demonstrated greater overall MRD negativity rates at 10−5 and 10−6 thresholds compared with DVd. In addition, for those patients achieving MRD negativity, more patients had sustained MRD-negative status for ≥12 months in BVd arm compared with DVd arm, further demonstrating the link between achieving deep and durable treatment responses. Funding: GSK (study ID, 207503). Drug-linker technology licensed from Seagen Inc; monoclonal antibody produced using POTELLIGENT Technology licensed from BioWa.
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 | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 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 ».