Proteasome inhibitors in AL amyloidosis: focus on mechanism of action and clinical activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proteasome inhibitors are the backbone in the treatment of multiple myeloma with 3 of its representatives (bortezomib, carfilzomib, and ixazomib) having already been approved. There is a different situation altogether in the treatment of amyloid light chain (AL) amyloidosis where owing to the rarity of this entity neither of these drugs has currently gained approval. Amyloid light chain plasma cells are possibly more vulnerable to bortezomib than myeloma plasmocytes because of a slightly distinct mechanism of action, which is described in depth in this manuscript. Bortezomib is highly active and rapidly effective as a single agent and even more potent in combination with dexamethasone and alkylators. Bortezomib-based regimens have become a standard part of the initial treatment of AL amyloidosis in the majority of centers. We have reviewed all available data on bortezomib in various combinations and settings. Carfilzomib seems to be effective but also toxic in these fragile patients with a high rate of cardiac events. Oral ixazomib has shown a surprisingly high efficacy with manageable toxicity and has received the Food and Drug Administration Breakthrough Therapy designation in 2014 for relapsed AL amyloidosis patients. In this review we have comprehensively described the current available knowledge of these 3 proteasome inhibitors and their use in AL amyloidosis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".