MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A Phase II Trial of Myeloma Induction Therapy with Cyclophosphamide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (Cybor-D): Improved Response over Historical Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone Controls.

2007· article· en· W2980137220 on OpenAlexaff
Craig B. Reeder, Donna Reece, Rafaël Fonseca, P. Leif Bergsagel, Joseph G. Hentz, Nicholas Pirooz, Jacy E. Boesiger, Jesus G. Pisa, Vishal Kukreti, Christine Chen, Suzanne Trudel, Joseph Mıkhael, Martha Q. Lacy, S. Vincent Rajkumar, A. Keith Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLenalidomideDexamethasoneMedicineMultiple myelomaBortezomibInternal medicinePrednisoneCyclophosphamideGastroenterologyPhases of clinical researchSurgeryToxicityOncologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: We previously reported an 85% response rate with 54% CR/nCR using a combination of cyclophosphamide (Cy), prednisone, and bortezomib (BZ) in relapsed myeloma (MM). We now report a Phase II clinical trial using a combination of Cy, BZ, and dexamethasone (Dex) [Cybor-D] in newly-diagnosed MM. We then compare the activity of this combination with historical controls treated with our current induction standard of Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (L-Dex). Methods: 30 patients have been enrolled on Cybor-D. Treatment consists of Cy 300mg/m2 p.o. days 1, 8, 15, and 22; BZ 1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, and 11, and Dex 40mg p.o. days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20. Prophylactic use of acyclovir, a quinolone and antifungal prophylaxis was highly recommended for all patients on study. Growth factors were allowed. As a relevant contemporaneous control for speed and depth of response, we used 33 patients treated on a recent Mayo Clinic trial of L-Dex (Rajkumar. Blood: 2005 106;4050–3). Response was defined according to IMWG criteria although in the current trial, bone marrows for confirmation of CR are not yet available on all patients. Results: At time of current analysis, 17 patients on Cybor-D were evaluable through at least one cycle for response and toxicity. Baseline characteristics included mean age of 57, 29% female, 41/24% ISS stage II/III. There were statistically more early stage patients on L-Dex; otherwise, baseline patient characteristics were similar. The mean % decline in monoclonal (M) protein from baseline following cycles 1–4 of Cybor-D were 71%, 90%, 93%, 96%. This compares favorably with L-Dex where equivalent % decline in M proteins were 66%, 77%, 80%, and 79%. Thus, in preliminary results, Cybor-D produces a more rapid initial decline and mean % reduction in M protein than L-Dex. Overall response rate (≥ PR) after one cycle of Cybor-D was 77% with 36% obtaining ≥VGPR (L-Dex 73% and 18% respectively). The % of patients obtaining ≥VGPR after each cycle was 36%, 64%, 77%, and 100% for Cybor-D as compared to 18%, 36%, 42%, and 33% for L-Dex. The overall ≥VGPR at the end of four cycles of Cybor-D is currently100% (≥ 66%nCR using older nomeclature). Major toxicities ≥ grade 3 for Cybor-D included hematologic (37%), hyperglycemia (15%) and neuropathy (11%). Conclusions: In summary, for newly-diagnosed MM patients, four cycles of Cybor-D produces more frequent, rapid and deep responses when contrasted with historical L-Dex controls. Further confirmation of response rates and effect on TTP will be required.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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