MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lenalidomide Overcomes Poor Prognosis Conferred by del13q and t(4;14) but Not del17p13 in Multiple Myeloma: Results of the Canadian MM016 Trial.

2007· article· en· W2553842621 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nizar J. Bahlis, Kevin Song, Young Trieu, Birgitte Roland, Esther Masih‐Khan, Hong Chang, Hélène Bruyèrè, Adnan Mansoor, Douglas E. Horsman, Michael Eliasziw, Douglas A. Stewart, Donna Reece

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLenalidomideMedicineThalidomideMultiple myelomaInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)GastroenterologyOncologyUrologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The outcome of conventional therapy in MM is highly heterogeneous and appears to be largely dictated by the presence of recurrent genomic aberrations. Among these t(4;14), deletion 17p13 (TP53 locus), maf gene translocations and to a lesser extent del13q define a subgroup of patients with high risk disease. We here report on the efficacy (RR, PFS and OS) of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (len-dex) in relapsed MM patients according to their del13q, t(4;14) and del17p13 status. The MM016 is a multicenter single arm open label expanded access program for len in relapsed and refractory MM. Pts received dex orally (40mg, days 1–4; 9–12 and 17–20 for 4 cycles, then days 1–4 beginning with cycle 5) and len 25mg orally on days 1–21 of a 28 days cycle. FISH studies with commercially available probes detected the presence or absence of del13q, t(4;14)(p16;q32) and del17p13 on the interphase bone marrow aspirates. Blade criteria were used to define RR. PFS and OS were defined according to the international uniform response criteria. 159 patients with FISH results available for a least one of the genomic aberrations were included in this analysis: median age was 61 yrs (32–85), 50.3% had ISS stage II or III, median beta2-microglobulin was 3.055 mg/L (0.69–17.5), median number of prior treatments was 3 (1–6) with 50.3% previously treated with thalidomide, 43.7% with bortezomib and 73% with SCT. Del13q, t(4;14) and del17p13 were detected in 57 (37.3%), 21(19.1%) and 11 (11.6%) of patients, respectively. The overall response RR (CR+PR) to len-dex was 77.3% (14.4% CR and nCR) and 64.9% for the del13q, 76.2% for t(4;14) and 63.6% for del17p patients. The median PFS was 10.56 months (95%C.I.[6.65–14.48]). The median OS was not reached at the time of this analysis with 55.4% alive at a median follow-up of 16 months. PFS and OS were also similar when results were analyzed according to the presence or absence of del13q, t(4;14), ISS stage and prior SCT. In univariate analysis, prior thalidomide or bortezomib exposure, number of prior lines of therapy, depth of response (CR vs PR) and the presence of del17p13 by FISH did result in lower PFS and OS. However in multivariate analysis only the presence of 17p13 deletion and the depth of response correlated with PFS and OS (Table). Treatment with len-dex overcomes the poor prognosis conferred by t(4;14), high beta2-microglobulin and del13q in relapsed and refractory MM. Patients with deletion of the TP53 locus still fare very poorly despite a rapid initial response to len-dex. Confirmation of these results in patients with del17p13 with a larger prospective study is clearly warranted. Variable PFS OS HR, 95% CI p value HR, 95% CI p value t(4;14) 0.92(0.29–2.13) 0.920 1.26(0.46–3.42 0.641 Del 13 0.90 (0.44–1.83) 0.783 0.56 (0.25–1.29) 0.179 Del17p13 6.26 (2.48–15.77) 0.000 3.83(1.34–10.93) 0.012 ISS III 2.03 (0.42–9.82) 0.376 1.72 (0.39–11.33) 0.378 Prior Thal 1.12 (0.51–2.44) 0.768 1.22 (0.53–2.82) 0.633 Prior Bortez 1.29 (0.61–2.74) 0.501 1.66 (0.74–3.71) 0.215 Response ≤ PR vs CR 3.031 (2.14–4.27) 0.000 2.17 (1.50–3.12) 0.000

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)0.001
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207