MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

High-Dose Cyclophosphamide in Highly Refractory Multiple Myeloma Patients As a Bridge to Further Novel Therapies

2016· article· en· W2771680190 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anna S. Nikonova, Stephen Caplan, April Shamy, M Gyger

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreJewish General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineMultiple myelomaLenalidomideProgression-free survivalCyclophosphamideSurgeryRegimenRefractory (planetary science)OncologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Despite major advances in the treatment of multiple myeloma with novel therapies including proteozome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, most patients during the course of their disease will become refractory to all agents. The prognosis of such patients is very poor. Some patients have extensive bone marrow involvement with resulting cytopenias, making them ineligible for clinical trials. The alternative route using aggressive cytoreduction therapies such as VTD-PACE, DCEP, V-DCEP, may have a limited role to serve as debulking agents and as a bridge to a next line of therapy because of their overwheming toxicity. In this pilot study, we chose to treat refractory patients with single agent high dose cyclophosphamide (HDCY), combined with dexamethasone, with the aim to bridge responding patients to a next line of therapy. Objectives: Primary outcome: to assess overall response rate (ORR). Secondary outcomes: to assess progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Methods: Prospective cohort study of patients treated between April 2013 and April 2016 at the Montreal Jewish General Hospital with HDCY, 1.2gr/m2, day 1 and 3, q21days x 4, and dexamethasone, 40mg PO, Q week. All patients received neupogen and levaquin as prophylaxis. PFS was defined as the time between initiation of HDCY and the date of first documented disease progression or death from any cause. Response was assessed by IMWG 2014 criteria. Responders included patients achieving ≥ PR. Kaplan Meier method was used to calculate progression-free and overall survival. Results: A total of 18 patients was included in the analysis. The median age was 61years (range, 44-71), median time from diagnosis until HDCY treatment was 57 months (range, 5-108). Patients were heavily pretreated, with median 4 prior lines of therapy (range, 1-7). All patients had been refractory to their last line of therapy. Seventeen patients (94%) were refractory to both bortezomib and lenalidomide containing regimens, and sixteen patients (88%) had an ASCT. Median number of HDCY cycles administered was 4 (range, 2-5). Median follow up was 10 months. ORR to HDCY was 55%, with three patients achieving CR (15%). Twelve patients (67%) went on to further therapies after achieving at least stable disease. Median PFS was 6 months, and median OS was 12 months. This regimen was complicated almost exclusively by hematological toxicity, with 14 out 18 patients experiencing G4 neutropenia. Thirteen patients were admitted for febrile neutropenia. There were no treatment related mortality. Conclusion: HDCY with dexamethasone has proven to be in this small prospective study a highly efficient rescue regimen for double refractory, advanced stage disease myeloma patients, providing the opportunity to bridge the majority of these patients to further novel therapies, also including a second ASCT. Disclosures Shamy: Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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