MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014488763 · doi:10.1002/jha2.4

Randomized, placebo‐controlled, phase 3 study of perifosine combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed, refractory multiple myeloma previously treated with bortezomib

2020· article· en· W3014488763 on OpenAlexaff
Paul G. Richardson, Arnon Nagler, Dina Ben‐Yehuda, Ashraf Badros, Parameswaran Hari, Roman Hájek, Ivan Špıčka, Hakan Kaya, Richard LeBlanc, Sung‐Soo Yoon, Kihyun Kım, Joaquín Martínez‐López, Moshe Mittelman, Ofer Shpilberg, Paul A. Blake, Teru Hideshima, Kathleen Colson, Jacob P. Laubach, Irene M. Ghobrial, Merav Leiba, Moshe E. Gatt, Peter Sportelli, Michael Chen, Kenneth C. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueeJHaem · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBortezomibMedicineInternal medicineDexamethasoneClinical endpointMultiple myelomaPlaceboHazard ratioInterim analysisAdverse effectSurgeryGastroenterologyOncologyRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Perifosine, an investigational, oral, synthetic alkylphospholipid, inhibits signal transduction pathways of relevance in multiple myeloma (MM) including PI3K/Akt. Perifosine demonstrated anti‐MM activity in preclinical studies and encouraging early‐phase clinical activity in combination with bortezomib. A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase 3 study was conducted to evaluate addition of perifosine to bortezomib‐dexamethasone in MM patients with one to four prior therapies who had relapsed following previous bortezomib‐based therapy. The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS). The study was discontinued at planned interim analysis, with 135 patients enrolled. Median PFS was 22.7 weeks (95% confidence interval 16·0–45·4) in the perifosine arm and 39.0 weeks (18.3–50.1) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio 1.269 [0.817–1.969]; P = .287); overall response rates were 20% and 27%, respectively. Conversely, median overall survival (OS) was 141.9 weeks and 83.3 weeks (hazard ratio 0.734 [0.380–1.419]; P = .356). Overall, 61% and 55% of patients in the perifosine and placebo arms reported grade 3/4 adverse events, including thrombocytopenia (26% vs 14%), anemia (7% vs 8%), hyponatremia (6% vs 8%), and pneumonia (9% vs 3%). These findings demonstrate no PFS benefit from the addition of perifosine to bortezomib‐dexamethasone in this study of relapsed/refractory MM, but comparable safety and OS.

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)0.003
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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