Pomalidomide (POM) + low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) after lenalidomide (LEN)-based second-line (2L) treatment (Tx) in patients (Pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): Analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) by level of disease control.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8027 Background: Recent trials of triple therapy in 2L and third-line (3L) Tx excluded pts refractory to LEN. This is not reflective of standard of care in first line and 2L where LEN is given until progressive disease (PD). MM-014 enrolled pts with RRMM and 2L LEN-based Tx failure. Here we report results only from cohort A of pts receiving POM + LoDEX. Cohort B will investigate POM + LoDEX + daratumumab. Methods: Adult pts with MM, 2 prior Tx lines, and PD after ≥ 2 cycles of 2L LEN-based Tx received POM + LoDEX. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Other endpoints included time to response (TTR), PFS, second primary malignancies (SPMs), and biomarkers. Results: Of 51 pts in cohort A, 39 (76.5%) discontinued Tx. Most pts (88.2%) were refractory to their last LEN Tx, (median Tx duration 24.6 mos) and 72.5% had prior bortezomib. At a median follow-up of 13.6 mos, ORR was 29.4% (2.0% complete response, 9.8% very good partial response, and 17.6% partial response [PR]) and median TTR was 1.9 mos; 66% of pts had ongoing response at 1 yr. Minimal response [MR] was reached in 15.7%. Median PFS was 13.8 mos. Pts with ≥ MR had similar Tx durations as those achieving ≥ PR. Additional results in Table. Post-Tx T-cell populations were significantly higher vs baseline (CD3+, 72.6% vs 67.8%; CD3+/CD8+, 36.9% vs 32.1%). Relative changes from baseline were significantly greater in pts with response vs pts with no response (CD3+, 10.4 vs −0.8; CD3+/CD4+, 4.2 vs −3.5). Conclusions: This update confirms the safety and efficacy of POM + LoDEX following 2L LEN-based Tx failure in pts with RRMM. Hematologic adverse event (AE) rates improved and median PFS was longer with 3L use than previously reported with POM + LoDEX use in later Tx lines. In addition, achieving disease control of ≥ MR led to similar PFS rates as reaching ≥ PR. Clinical trial information: NCT01946477. [Table: see text]
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".