MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095134159 · doi:10.1182/blood-2020-135874

Apollo: Phase 3 Randomized Study of Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (D-Pd) Versus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone (Pd) Alone in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

2020· article· en· W3095134159 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meletios Α. Dimopoulos, Evangelos Terpos, Mario Boccadoro, Sosana Delimpasi, Meral Beksaç, Eirini Katodritou, Philippe Moreau, Luca Baldini, Argiris Symeonidis, Jelena Bila, Albert Oriol, María‐Victoria Mateos, Hermann Einsele, Ioannis Orfanidis, Tahamtan Ahmadi, Jon Ukropec, Tobias Kampfenkel, Jordan M. Schecter, Yanping Qiu, Himal Amin, Jessica Vermeulen, Robin Carson, Pieter Sonneveld

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPomalidomideDaratumumabDexamethasoneMedicineInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)OncologyMultiple myelomaLenalidomideMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Immunomodulatory drug (IMiD)-based regimens are a standard of care (SOC) for RRMM. Daratumumab (DARA) is a CD38-targeted mAb approved for treatment of pts with RRMM. The subcutaneous (SC) formulation of DARA has a similar safety profile as intravenous DARA, with a statistically significant reduction in infusion-related reaction (IRR) rates and a considerably shorter administration duration of 5 mins. DARA SC is approved for use in the US, EU, Canada, and Korea. In the phase 1b study of DARA plus the IMiD pomalidomide, D-Pd induced deep responses and was well tolerated in pts with heavily pretreated RRMM, including those with prior lenalidomide (len) treatment. D-Pd is approved in the US for RRMM pts with ≥2 prior lines of therapy, including len and a proteasome inhibitor (PI). APOLLO (NCT03180736) is a phase 3 study conducted in collaboration between European Myeloma Network investigators and Janssen to evaluate DARA SC plus Pd vs Pd alone in RRMM pts who had received ≥1 prior line of therapy including len and a PI. We report the primary analysis of APOLLO. Methods In this open-label, multicenter study, eligible pts had RRMM and received ≥1 prior line of therapy including len and a PI, had responded to prior treatment and progressed on or after their last regimen; pts with only 1 prior line of therapy (1PL) were required to be refractory to len. Prior anti-CD38 or pomalidomide was not permitted. Pts were randomized 1:1 to Pd ± DARA SC. Stratification was based on International Staging System (ISS) disease stage (I, II, III) and number of lines of prior therapy (1, 2-3, ≥4). All pts received 28-day treatment cycles (C). P: 4 mg (PO) QD on Days 1-21; d: 40 mg (PO) on Days 1, 8, 15 and 22 (20 mg for pts ≥75 years of age). For D-Pd pts, DARA was given QW for C 1-2, Q2W for C 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. Prior to protocol amendment, pts received DARA IV 16 mg/kg (n=7); after protocol amendment, all pts received DARA SC 1,800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 (rHuPH20; ENHANZE® drug delivery technology, Halozyme, Inc.). All pts were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS. Major secondary endpoints included overall response rate, rates of very good partial response or better and complete response or better, MRD-negativity rate, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results A total of 304 pts from 12 European countries were randomized (151 D-Pd; 153 Pd). The median (range) age was 67 (35-90) years, and 45%/33%/22% pts were ISS stage I/II/III. 35% had high cytogenetic risk (presence of del17p, t[14;16], or t[4;14]). 11% of pts had received 1PL (median [range] prior lines of therapy = 2 [1-5]). 82% of pts were refractory to len, 68% of pts were refractory to a PI, and 63% of pts were refractory to both. Median duration of treatment was 11.5 months with D-Pd vs 6.6 months with Pd. The primary analysis was performed after 190 PFS events. The study met its primary endpoint of improved PFS; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.47-0.85; P=0.0018), representing a 37% reduction in the risk of progression or death in pts treated with D-Pd. The median PFS for the D-Pd vs Pd arms was 12.4 vs 6.9 months, respectively. With a median follow-up of 16.9 months, 99 pts (33%) have died; the HR for OS was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.61-1.35); survival data are immature and follow-up is ongoing. ≥CR rates for D-Pd vs Pd were 24.5% vs 3.9%; ≥VGPR rates were 51.0% vs 19.6%. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events with a >5% difference between D-Pd vs Pd were neutropenia (68% vs 51%), leukopenia (17% vs 5%), lymphopenia (12% vs 3%), febrile neutropenia (9% vs 3%), and pneumonia (13% vs 7%). The rate of IRRs with DARA SC was low (6%, all grade 1/2), and 2% of pts had local injection-site reactions (all grade 1). Median duration of injection was 5 mins. Rates of study treatment discontinuation due to TEAEs were similar for D-Pd vs Pd (2% vs 3%). The safety profile of D-Pd is consistent with known profiles of DARA SC and Pd. Conclusion In this phase 3 study evaluating DARA SC plus Pd, D-Pd significantly reduced the risk of progression or death by 37% in pts with RRMM who had received ≥1 prior line of therapy vs Pd alone. No new safety concerns were observed. The IRR rate was very low and administration duration short, thus increasing convenience for pts and decreasing treatment burden. Collectively, these data show that D-Pd is an effective and convenient treatment for pts with RRMM who received ≥1 prior therapy, including len and a PI. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Beigene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Terpos:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Beksac:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Katodritou:Theagenion Cancer Hospital: Current Employment; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Expenses, Research Funding; Genesis Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Expenses, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Moreau:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Symeonidis:Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; WinMedica: Research Funding; GenesisPharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi/Genzyme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Oriol:Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mateos:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaMar-Zeltia: Consultancy; Abbvie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Regeneron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations51
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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