MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ELOQUENT-2: A phase III, randomized, open-label study of lenalidomide (Len)/dexamethasone (dex) with/without elotuzumab (Elo) in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).

2015· article· en· W2215699720 on OpenAlexaff
Sagar Lonial, Meletios Α. Dimopoulos, Antonio Palumbo, Darrell White, Sebastian Grosicki, Ivan Špıčka, Adam Walter‐Croneck, Philippe Moreau, María‐Victoria Mateos, Hila Magen‐Nativ, Andrew R. Belch, Donna Reece, Meral Beksaç, Masafumi Taniwaki, Christoph Röllig, Anil Singhal, Jessica Katz, Eric Bleickardt, Valerie Poulart, Paul G. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLenalidomideThalidomideInternal medicineDexamethasoneClinical endpointMultiple myelomaBortezomibDiscontinuationInterim analysisRefractory (planetary science)TolerabilityPhases of clinical researchProgression-free survivalGastroenterologyNeutropeniaOncologySurgeryToxicityAdverse effectRandomized controlled trialChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

8508 Background: Elo, a monoclonal antibody (mAb) targeting Signaling Lymphocytic Activation Molecule F7 (SLAMF7), kills myeloma cells with minimal effect on normal tissue. Elo showed encouraging activity with Len/dex (Ld) in a phase Ib/II study in pts with RRMM. This phase III study (NCT01239797) compared efficacy and safety of Elo/Len/dex (ELd) vs Ld. Methods: Pts with RRMM, 1–3 prior therapies (not Len-refractory), were randomized 1:1 to ELd or Ld in 28-day cycles to disease progression/unacceptable toxicity: Elo (10 mg/kg intravenously) weekly cycles 1+2 then biweekly; Len (25 mg) D1–21; dex weekly (40 mg or [Elo wks] 28 mg oral + 8 mg intravenous). Response/progression was assessed by independent review committee by EBMT criteria. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR). Results of an interim analysis are reported. Results: Six hundred and forty-six pts were randomized (321 ELd, 325 Ld; median age 66; del(17p) 32%; t[4;14] 9%; refractory to last therapy 35%). Median (range) prior therapies: 2 (1–4), including bortezomib 70%, thalidomide 48%, Len 6%. At data cut-off (4 November 2014), 35% (ELd) and 21% (Ld) of pts remained on therapy; discontinuation was mainly for disease progression (42% ELd, 47% Ld). Median follow-up was 24 months; median (95% CI) PFS: ELd 19.4 (16.6, 22.2) months, Ld 14.9 (12.1, 17.2) months (HR [95% CI] 0.70 [0.57, 0.85]; p = 0.0004). 1-year PFS was 68% ELd, 57% Ld; 2-year PFS: 41% ELd, 27% Ld. PFS benefit with ELd was consistent across key subgroups. ORR (95% CI) was 79% (74, 83) ELd, 66% (60, 71) Ld (p = 0.0002). G3–4 adverse events ≥ 15% (ELd vs Ld) were neutropenia (25%, 33%); anemia (15%, 16%). Exposure-adjusted infection rate was the same in both arms (incidence rate/100 person-years of exposure, 197). Infusion reactions (IRs) occurred in 10% of pts with ELd (mostly G1–2). There were 210 deaths (94 ELd, 116 Ld). Conclusions: A clinically relevant 30% reduction in risk of progression or death was seen with ELd vs Ld. More pts remain on ELd vs Ld and follow-up for long-term outcomes, including survival, is ongoing. IRs were manageable. Elo, a mAb with a novel immunotherapeutic mechanism of action, showed improved PFS, with minimal added toxicity in combination with Ld vs Ld alone, in pts with multiple myeloma. Clinical trial information: NCT01239797.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.199
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207