Bortezomib Demonstrates Superior Efficacy to High-Dose Dexamethasone in Relapsed Multiple Myeloma: Final Report of the APEX Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction/Methods: This international phase 3 study conducted at 93 sites is the largest randomized study to date in relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Patients (pts) had to have received 1–3 prior therapies and those with dexamethasone (Dex) refractory disease were excluded. Pts were randomized to bortezomib (VELCADE®) 1.3 mg/m2 IV d 1, 4, 8, 11 q3wk for 8 cycles followed by 3 cycles on d 1, 8, 15, 22 q5wk, or Dex 40 mg PO d 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 q5wk for 4 cycles followed by 5 cycles on d 1–4 every 28 d. The 1° endpoint was time to progression (TTP); 2° endpoints included survival, response rate (CR+PR) using EBMT criteria, duration of response, time to response (TTR), time to skeletal events, infections ≥gr 3 and safety; exploratory endpoints included pharmacogenomics and quality of life. Pts with progressive disease on Dex were eligible to crossover to bortezomib in a companion study. Results: 669 pts were randomized and baseline characteristics were balanced in both arms. Based on a median follow-up of 8.3 mo, bortezomib demonstrated a 78% improvement in median TTP (hazard ratio 0.55, P<0.0001) and a significant 1-y and overall survival benefit over Dex (hazard ratio 0.53, P=0.0005; hazard ratio 0.57, P=0.0013, respectively). The response rate (CR+PR) was significantly higher (P<0.0001) with CR/nCR rates of 13% for bortezomib vs 2% for Dex. 132 (40%) and 119 (35%) pts received bortezomib or Dex 2nd line, respectively. Importantly, in 2nd-line bortezomib vs Dex, median TTP was 7.0 v 5.6 mo, 1-y survival was 89% vs 72%, and CR+PR rate was 45% vs 26%, respectively. The incidence of ≥ gr 3 adverse events and the discontinuation rate were similar across treatments in all pts. Conclusion: This is the first and largest randomized study demonstrating a survival advantage in relapsed MM, with single-agent bortezomib proving superior to Dex based on TTP, survival, and response. Superiority was also observed in 2nd line and later salvage therapy. The safety profiles of bortezomib and Dex were predictable and toxicities were manageable. Efficacy Bortezomib Dex P (n=333) (n=336) NC = not calculated. Median TTP, mo 6.2 3.5 <0.0001 1 prior line 7.0 (n=132) 5.6 (n=119) 0.0021 > 1 prior line 4.9 (n=200) 2.9 (n=217) <0.0001 1-year survival, % 80 66 0.0005 1 prior line 89 72 0.0098 > 1 prior line 73 62 0.0109 CR, % (n/N) 6 (20/315) 1 (2/312) 0.0001 1 prior line 6 (8/128) 2 (2/110) 0.0842 > 1 prior line 6 (12/187) 0 (0/202) 0.0002 CR/PR, % (n/N) 38 (121/315) 18 (56/312) <0.0001 1 prior line 45 (57/128) 26 (29/110) 0.0035 > 1 prior line 34 (64/187) 13 (27/202) <0.0001 Median TTR (CR/PR), d 43 43 NC
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".