MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Safety and Efficacy of Daratumumab Monotherapy in Patients with Heavily Pretreated Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Final Results from GEN501 and Sirius

2017· article· en· W2955312833 on OpenAlexaff
Saad Z. Usmani, Hareth Nahi, Brendan M. Weiss, Nizar J. Bahlis, Andrew Belch, Henk M. Lokhorst, Peter M. Voorhees, Paul G. Richardson, Clarissa Uhlar, Jianping Wang, Ming Qi, Sagar Lonial

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaratumumabMedicineInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Phases of clinical researchProteasome inhibitorGastroenterologyMultiple myelomaLenalidomideOncologySurgeryClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Daratumumab (DARA) is a CD38-targeting IgGκ monoclonal antibody with antimyeloma activity mediated by both on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanisms of action. In two clinical studies (NCT00574288 [GEN501] and NCT01985126 [SIRIUS]), DARA monotherapy induced rapid, deep, and durable responses with a favorable safety profile in patients with heavily treated, relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (Lokhorst HM. N Engl J Med 2015;373[13]:1207-1219. Lonial S. Lancet 2016;387[10027]:1551-1560). A combined analysis of patients who received 16 mg/kg DARA in these studies at a median follow-up of 20.7 months was reported previously (Usmani SZ. Blood 2016;128[1]:37-44). Here, we present the final safety and efficacy findings for these patients after median follow-up of approximately 3 years. Methods: GEN501 was a first-in-human, open-label, phase 1/2 study comprising a dose-escalation phase (Part 1) and a dose-expansion phase (Part 2). The study enrolled patients with MM that had relapsed after or was refractory to ≥2 prior therapies. In Part 2, patients received an initial infusion of 16 mg/kg DARA, which was followed by a 3-week rest period and then by DARA infusions once weekly (QW) for 7 weeks, once every 2 weeks (Q2W) for 14 weeks, and once every 4 weeks (Q4W) thereafter. SIRIUS was an open-label phase 2 study of DARA in patients with MM who had received ≥3 prior therapies, including a proteasome inhibitor (PI) or immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), or who were double refractory to a PI and an IMiD. Patients (n = 106) received 16 mg/kg DARA IV QW for 8 weeks, Q2W for 16 weeks, and Q4W thereafter. Patients treated with 16 mg/kg DARA in GEN501 Part 2 and in SIRIUS were included in this combined analysis. Overall response rate (ORR) was calculated based on computerized algorithm results from both studies. Results : The combined analysis included 148 patients (42 from GEN501 Part 2 and 106 from SIRIUS) who were treated with 16 mg/kg DARA. Seventy-six percent of patients had received >3 prior therapies. Ninety-one percent of patients were refractory to their last line of therapy, and 87% were refractory to both a PI and an IMiD. In the combined analysis set, the median duration of follow-up was 36.6 (range 0.5-42.3) months. The most common (≥20%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) observed across the 2 studies were unchanged from previous reports: fatigue (42%), nausea (30%), anemia (28%), back pain (27%), cough (26%), upper respiratory tract infection (22%), neutropenia (21%), thrombocytopenia (21%), pyrexia (20%), and nasal congestion (20%). The most common (≥5%) grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were anemia (18%), thrombocytopenia (14%), neutropenia (10%), and hypertension (5%). Infusion-related reactions were observed in 71 (48%) patients and predominantly occurred during the first infusion. ORR was 30.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.1-38.5), with 20 (13.5%) patients achieving VGPR or better and 7 (4.7%) achieving CR or better (Table). In both studies, deep responses were maintained over time. Among responders, the median duration of response was 8.0 months (95% CI 6.5-14.7), and 19.6% (95% CI 9.0-33.2) of responders remained progression free at 3 years. Median overall survival (OS) was 20.5 months (95% CI 16.6-28.1, Figure), and the 3-year OS rate was 36.5% (95% CI 28.4-44.6). Case reports of patients with prolonged, ongoing responses will be described. Conclusions: After 3 years of median follow-up, single-agent DARA continues to demonstrate a favorable safety profile with no new safety signals. Deep and durable responses continue to be maintained in a subset of these heavily pretreated patients. With over one-third of patients remaining alive after 3 years of study entry, these findings highlight the activity of single-agent DARA in this heavily pretreated population. Disclosures Usmani: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Weiss: Janssen: Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Prothena: Research Funding; Prothena: Honoraria. Bahlis: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Belch: Amgen, Celgene, Takeda: Honoraria. Lokhorst: OncoImmune: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genmab: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Voorhees: Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Richardson: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides AB: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Uhlar: Janssen: Employment. Wang: Janssen: Employment. Qi: Janssen: Employment; Johnson & Johnson, LLC: Equity Ownership.

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)0.002
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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