MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

“Longterm Survival (≥10 years) in Multiple Myeloma (MM) Is Associated with Longer Duration of Therapy and Improved Quality of Response to Novel agents”.

2009· article· en· W2979871905 on OpenAlexaff
Nastaran Noroozi, Donna Reece, Suzanne Trudel, Vishal Kukreti, Peter Anglin, Kimberly A. Fernandes, Christine Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMultiple myelomaInternal medicineSurgeryBortezomibMedian follow-upPediatricsOverall survival

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 2793 Poster Board II-769 Introduction: Over the past decade, survival of MM patients (pts) has improved significantly, with median survival currently estimated at 4-4.5 years (yrs). Much of this improvement can be attributed to the introduction of novel agents such as bortezomib and the immunomodulatory drugs in the late 1990's (Kumar et al, Blood 2008). Despite these therapeutic advances, long-term survivors of ≥10 yrs in MM are uncommon and account for <10% of pts. In this report, we identified 39 MM pts diagnosed over a 4 yr period (1994-1998) at our institution who have survived ≥10 yrs and aimed to define disease/treatment characteristics. Methods: Between January 1994 and November 1998, 39 MM pts diagnosed at Princess Margaret Hospital were identified as long-term survivors (≥10 years) with median follow-up of 12.3 years (range 11.2-13.6 yrs). Pt demographics, disease and treatment characteristics, and response outcomes were collected from a MM database and by retrospective chart review. An additional 47 MM pts diagnosed during the same 4 year time frame with <10 year survival were reviewed as controls. The median follow-up for these control pts was 6.9 yrs (range 5.3-8.3). Results: Patient and disease characteristics: Median age at diagnosis for the 39 long-term survivors was 51 yrs (range 46-57), 22 pts (56%) male. Myeloma subtypes included: IgG 21(54%), IgA 9(23%), IgD 1(3%), light chain only 6(15%), Non-secretory 2(5%). Most pts (97%) had undergone autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), 13 of whom (37%) received a second salvage transplant at relapse. Median age at first transplant was 53 yrs (range 45-61). At diagnosis, 27 pts (73%) had bone lesions and only 1 pt (2.6%) had renal failure (serum creatinine ≥177umol/L (2mg/dL). Baseline lab values at diagnosis: median hemoglobin 115g/L (range 45-149), WBC 5.2/uL (range 3.1-9.4), platelets 230/uL (range 153-402), creatinine 90umol/L(52-315), beta2-microglobulin 145 nmol/L (range 43-391; normal <170), BM plasmacytosis 51% (range 15-80). Cytogenetics were not routinely available. No differences in baseline variables were noted from the 47 control pts diagnosed during the same 4 year period. Treatment characteristics: Of all 86 pts, 54 pts (63%) were exposed to one or more of the novel agents including thalidomide (59%), bortezomib (31%) and lenalidomide (39%). During the time period when first relapse was anticipated, thalidomide was the primary novel agent available at our institution. Although significantly fewer longterm survivors vs controls received thalidomide (41 vs 79%; p=0.002), the duration of thalidomide exposure was significantly longer with the long-term survivors (median 28 vs 8.5 mos; p=0.03). The lower rates of thalidomide exposure in longterm survivors were not explained by earlier introduction of either lenalidomide or bortezomib to this group with longer time to both bortezomib and lenalidomide in the long-term survivors. In fact, time from diagnosis to exposure to any of the 3 novel agents was significantly longer for the long-term survivors than the control group (88mos (range 35-169) vs 67mos (range 13-133); p=0.009). However, as with thalidomide, long-term survivors were exposed to bortezomib for longer duration than the control group (median 5 vs 2 mos; p=0.009). No difference in rates or duration of exposure to lenalidomide between the 2 groups was noted. Of note, long-term survivors were more likely to have responded to any of the 3 novel agents (overall response 83% vs 53%, p=0.02) and were able to achieve a better quality of response than the control group (VGPR/CR 38% vs 3%; p=0.003). Conclusion: Long-term survivors of MM (≥10 years) are uncommon, even in the current era of novel agents (thalidomide, bortezomib, lenalidomide). In our review, we did not find that exposure alone or earlier use of novel agents (ie. shorter time from diagnosis to any novel agent) was associated with long-term survival. However, when compared to MM pts living <10 yrs, long-term survivors had significantly longer duration of exposure to novel agents and were able to achieve higher rates of response with better quality of responses (VGPR/CR). Our data support the hypothesis that prolonged therapy may be required to achieve durable and high quality responses in MM pts. Hence, further studies of “maintenance” schedules are warranted. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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