MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2308972734 · doi:10.1182/blood.v124.21.81.81

Effect of Age on Efficacy and Safety Outcomes in Patients (Pts) with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) Receiving Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (Rd): The First Trial

2014· article· en· W2308972734 on OpenAlexaff
Cyrille Hulin, Thierry Façon, Chaim Shustik, Andrew R. Belch, Maria Teresa Petrucci, Ulrich Dührsen, Jin Lu, Kevin Song, Philippe Rodon, Brigitte Pegourié, Laurent Garderet, Hannah Hunter, I Azaïs, Richard Eek, Margaret Macro, Shaker R. Dakhil, Vanessa Houck, Guang Chen, Annette Ervin‐Haynes, Fritz Offner

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalRoyal Victoria Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLenalidomideClinical endpointThalidomideInterim analysisMultiple myelomaMelphalanAdverse effectGastroenterologyPrednisoneDexamethasoneSurgeryRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In the pivotal FIRST trial, a randomized, international, multicenter phase 3 study, continuous Rd compared with melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) improved progression-free survival (PFS) which was the primary endpoint (HR = 0.72; P < 0.01). The interim overall survival (OS) analysis showed a 22% reduction in risk of death with continuous Rd vs. MPT (HR = 0.78; P = 0.02) (Facon, Blood 2013). This analysis evaluates outcomes based on age, which was a stratification parameter, and compared pts aged ≤ 75 yrs and > 75 yrs. Methods: Pts with NDMM were randomized to continuous Rd until progressive disease (PD) (N = 535); 18 cycles (72 weeks [wks]) of Rd (Rd18; N = 541); or 12 cycles (72 wks) of MPT (N = 547). Starting doses were reduced in pts aged > 75 yrs: dexamethasone (20 vs. 40 mg), melphalan (0.20 vs. 0.25 mg/kg), and thalidomide (100 vs 200 mg). The primary endpoint was PFS (continuous Rd vs. MPT) and the secondary endpoint were OS, overall response rate, time to response, duration of response, time to Tx failure, time to 2nd AMT, health-related quality of life, safety. Results: The proportion of pts aged > 75 yrs was > 34% across treatment (Tx) arms. In pts ≤ 75 yrs, 37% had ISS stage III vs. 51% in > 75 yrs. ECOG score ≥ 1 was observed in 74% and 69% of pts aged > 75 and ≤ 75 yrs, respectively. Severe renal impairment (CrCl < 30 mL/min) was observed in 14% of pts > 75 vs. 7% in ≤ 75 yrs. PFS and OS outcomes favored continuous Rd over MPT in both age groups. With a median follow-up of 37 months (mos), PFS was 27.4 mos in continuous Rd pts vs. 21.8 mos in MPT pts aged ≤ 75 yrs (HR = 0.68; P < 0.001); a trend for improved PFS was also seen for pts aged > 75 yrs (HR = 0.81; P = 0.11) (Table 1). PFS for continuous Rd vs. Rd18 pts was also increased in both age groups (HR = 0.68; P < 0.001 and HR = 0.75; P = 0.03, respectively). Response rates were consistently higher with continuous Rd vs. MPT in pts aged ≤ 75 yrs (77% vs. 66%; P < 0.001) and > 75 yrs (71% vs. 55%; P < 0.001). Duration of response with continuous Rd was longer vs. MPT in pts aged ≤ 75 yrs (40 vs. 22 mos) and pts > 75 yrs (31 vs. 24 mos). The interim analysis of OS showed an improved trend for continuous Rd vs. MPT in pts aged ≤ 75 yrs (HR = 0.77; P = 0.06) and > 75 yrs (HR = 0.80; P= 0.16). Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) in ≥ 10% of pts were similar across age subgroups (Table 2). Tx discontinuation due to AEs was comparable across the Tx groups and independent of age. Conclusions:Regardless of age (≤ 75 vs. > 75 yrs), continuous Rd was effective, increased PFS and interim OS, and was generally well tolerated vs. MPT in NDMM pts. Duration of response was improved with continuous Rd vs. MPT and Rd18, irrespective of age, and with a more profound benefit observed in younger pts. Continuous Rd represents a new clinical option and standard of care for these pts in the first-line setting. Abstract 81. Table 1 PFS, OS and Response Aged ≤ 75 yrs Aged > 75 yrs All pts ITT population Continuous Rd (n = 349) Rd18 (n = 348) MPT (n = 359) Continuous Rd (n = 186) Rd18 (n = 193) MPT (n = 188) Continuous Rd (n = 535) Rd18 (n = 541) MPT (n = 547) Median PFS, mos 27.4 21.3 21.8 21.2 19.4 19.2 25.5 20.7 21.2 PFS HR (95% CI); P-value Continuous Rd vs. Rd18 0.68 (0.55–0.83); P < 0.01 0.75 (0.58–0.98); P = 0.03 0.70 (0.60–0.82); P < 0.01 Continuous Rd vs. MPT 0.68 (0.56–0.83); P < 0.01 0.81 (0.62–1.05); P = 0.11 0.72 (0.61–0.85); P < 0.01 4-yr OS, % 66 61 58 47 47 39 59 56 51 OS HR (95% CI); P-value Continuous Rd vs. Rd18 0.88 (0.67–1.16); P = 0.36 0.94 (0.69–1.29); P = 0.70 0.90 (0.73–1.10); P = 0.31 Continuous Rd vs. MPT 0.77 (0.59–1.01); P = 0.06 0.80 (0.59–1.09); P = 0.16 0.78 (0.64–0.96); P = 0.02 Response rate (≥ PR), % 77 77 66 71 66 55 75 73 62 Duration of response (≥ PR), mos 40 23 22 31 20 24 35 22 22 CI, confidence interval; ITT, intent to treat; PR, partial response. Table 2 Grade 3–4 AEs Observed in ≥ 10% of Pts Aged ≤ 75 yrs Aged > 75 yrs Safety population, % Continuous Rd (n = 347) Rd18 (n = 348) MPT (n = 357) Continuous Rd (n = 185) Rd18 (n = 192) MPT (n = 184) Neutropenia 28 25 47 28 29 40 Thrombocytopenia 8 9 13 9 7 7 Anemia 18 12 20 19 23 17 Leukopenia 5 6 11 4 5 8 Infections 29 21 16 29 23 20 DVT and/or PE 10 6 8 7 8 4 Peripheral sensory neuropathy 1 1 10 1 0 8 Tx discontinuation due to AEs 28 18 28 32 25 30 DVT, deep-vein thrombosis; PE, pulmonary embolism. Disclosures Hulin: Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide used in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Belch:Janssen, Celgene, Onyx: Honoraria. Petrucci:Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Sanofi, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Dührsen:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Song:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Houck:Celgene: Employment. Chen:Celgene: Employment. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene: Employment.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→