Pomalidomide (POM) Plus Low-Dose Dexamethasone (LoDEX) Improves Health-Related Quality Of Life (HRQoL) Vs High-Dose Dexamethasone (HiDEX) In Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Patients Enrolled In MM-003 Phase 3 Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Pronounced symptoms, poor prognosis, and therapy exhaustion each affect HRQoL in RRMM patients. The MM-003, randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 3 trial reported that POM + LoDEX significantly extended median progression-free and overall survival vs HiDEX in RRMM patients who exhausted bortezomib (BORT) and lenalidomide (LEN), and progressed on their last treatment (San Miguel, EHA, 2013). Improved survival outcomes, treatment-related toxicity, and aging populations have placed an emphasis on HRQoL in RRMM. MM-003 is the first study to investigate HRQoL in RRMM patients treated with POM + LoDEX. Methods Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive 28-day cycles (C) of POM 4 mg D1-21 + LoDEX 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged > 75 years) weekly or HiDEX 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged > 75 years) D1-4, 9-12, and 17-20 until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. HiDEX was chosen as the comparator to isolate the effects of POM as at the time of trial design, it was the standard salvage therapy for heavily pretreated patients. Time to meaningful worsening in HRQoL was analyzed for 5 predefined EORTC QLQ-C30 domains (Global Health Status, Physical Functioning, Fatigue, Emotional Functioning, and Pain) using the Kaplan-Meier method. A meaningful worsening was defined as a reduction in HRQoL equal to or greater than the domain-specific minimally important difference, calculated using the standard error of measurement. HRQoL was also evaluated cross-sectionally and longitudinally through a mixed effect model. Data from the September 7, 2012 data cut are presented below. Results 455 patients were randomized to POM + LoDEX (n = 302) or HiDEX (n = 153). 448 patients completed at least 1 QLQ-C30 questionnaire and were included in the HRQoL analysis. The median number of prior treatments was 5 (range, 2-17), and 82% were refractory to LEN and BORT. Median follow-up was 4.2 months. Analyses on time to clinically meaningful worsening showed that POM + LoDEX extended median time to meaningful worsening vs HiDEX for all the preselected domains (Table): Global Health Status (114 vs 85 days, P = .06), Physical Functioning (174 vs 106 days; P = .09), Fatigue (113 vs 60 days; P = .04), Emotional Functioning (190 vs 124 days; P = .02), and Pain (147 vs 113 days; P = .2). In the cross-sectional analysis, HRQoL scores were relatively better for POM + LoDEX vs HiDEX for all domains at every cycle. Statistically or marginally significant (P < .10) treatment differences were observed for Global Health Status (C2 and 4), Physical Functioning (C2, 3, and 4), Emotional Functioning (C3), and Fatigue (C2) domains. No statistically significant deteriorations from baseline were observed in the mean scores for the POM + LoDEX arm for any of the 5 domains at any treatment cycle. Such deteriorations were observed with HiDEX. These results were supported by a mixed effect model analysis. Data from the March 1, 2013 data cut will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions In heavily pretreated patients who exhausted BORT and LEN, POM + LoDEX resulted in better clinical outcomes and favorable HRQoL vs patients treated with HiDEX. POM + LoDEX should become a standard of care in relapsing patients as it has been proven to prolong and enhance the lives of RRMM patients. Disclosures: Song: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: POM is approved in the US but not in Europe. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Weisel:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Delforge:Celgene: Honoraria. Karlin:Celgene: Export board committee Other, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Oriol:Celgene: Consultancy. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knop:Celgene: Honoraria. Renner:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Travel support Other. Bahlis:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Amatya:Celgene: Consultancy. Yu:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Monzini:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sternas:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. San Miguel:Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".