MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Safety and Efficacy of Bortezomib (VELCADE™) in 104 Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma Who Have Received at Least Two Previous Lines of Therapy: Impact of Cytogenetics on Response from a Canadian Cohort.

2006· article· en· W2590011141 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joseph Mıkhael, Donna Reece, Andrew Belch, Nizar J. Bahlis, Deepa Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBortezomibMedicineMultiple myelomaInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Proteasome inhibitorNeutropeniaGastroenterologyProgressive diseaseDexamethasoneSurgeryOncologyToxicityChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Bortezomib (VELCADE™) is a reversible proteasome inhibitor that has been shown to be safe and efficacious in patients (pts) with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) using a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8 & 11 of a 21-day cycle. Certain cytogenetic abnormalities are associated with poor prognosis in MM, including deletion 13, t(4;14) and the p53 deletion.(Stewart et al, JCO2005; 23(26):6339–44). Bortezomib has demonstrated the ability to overcome the poor prognosis associated with deletion 13 (Jagannath, JCO2005; 23(16S) 6501). The impact of bortezomib on a broader range of cytogenetic abnormalities, such as t(4;14) has yet to be determined. Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, non-randomized, phase 3b study, pts with MM across 13 centres in Canada, who had received at least 2 previous lines of therapy and who were refractory to or had relapsed after their last therapy were enrolled. Pts received up to eight 3-week cycles of bortezomib on days 1, 4, 8 & 11. Dexamethasone 20 mg PO was administered on each day of and day after bortezomib administration if the pts either experienced progressive disease after receiving at least 2 treatment cycles of bortezomib or had no change in disease status from baseline after receiving at least 4 treatment cycles of bortezomib. Results: 104 pts were enrolled; the mean age in this cohort was 60.7 years, and 65 (62.5%) were male. Approximately 30% of pts had a Karnofsky performance status of 70 or less at baseline. 71 pts (68.3%) had received prior thalidomide therapy, 32 (30.8%) had received a prior autotransplant and 4 (3.8%) had received prior bortezomib treatment. 74 (71.2%) received 3 or more lines of prior MM therapy. During the study, mean number of bortezomib cycles completed was 4.6 (range, 0–11 cycles), and the number of pts that completed 8 cycles of therapy was 36 (34.6%). 15.2% of pts received dexamethasone at cycle 3 and 19.2% at cycle 5. Cytogenetic analysis was performed on approximately half of the pts. Response data for cycle 5 is currently available for 69/99 (69.7%) of evaluable pts (see Table 1). Overall, 76.9% of the pts experienced Grade 3 & 4 adverse events. Safety profile observed is similar to past trial results with bortezomib. Conclusion: In this large Canadian cohort of extensively pre-treated patients with mulitple myeloma, bortezomib demonstrated good response, consistent with previous studies. Analysis correlating cytogenetic profile and response rate is ongoing and will be available at the time of conference. In addition, a detailed safety analysis and impact of prior treatment on response will be analyzed and made available at the time of conference. Table 1. Response to Bortezomib Category of Response* No. of Patients (%) *Modified SWOG: CR 100% M-protein reduction; R 75–99%; PR 50–74%; MR 25–49%; SD<25%, PD increasing M-protein Any Response (CR + VGPR + PR + MR) 47 (68.1) ---Complete Response (CR) + Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) ---22 (31.9) ---Partial Response (PR) + Minimal Response (MR) ---25 (36.2) Stable Disease 10 (14.5) Progressive Disease 12 (17.4)

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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