MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246587232 · doi:10.4161/cbt.4.7.1973

Velcade Prolongs Survival in Relapsed Myeloma

2005· article· en· W4246587232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Biology & Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDexamethasoneMultiple myelomaBortezomibClinical trialInternal medicineProgressive diseaseOncologySurgeryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractJune 17, 2005Trial results support earlier use of new myeloma drugResearchers say Velcade warrants testing as first-line therapyFinal results of a large Phase III trial in relapsed multiple myeloma patients show that bortezomib, or Velcade, clearly outperformed a standard drug therapy for patients with relapsed myeloma and now warrants further testing as initial therapy for the blood disease, say researchers from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.The largest trial of its kind, the APEX study compared Velcade against high-dose dexamethasone in 669 patients who had been previously treated with other drugs but had relapsed.An article in the June 16 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine reports that Velcade caused a partial or total response in 38 percent of patients, compared with 18 percent for dexamethasone. The Velcade patients went an average of 6.2 months before the disease progressed again; the time to progression was 3.5 months in patients taking dexamethasone. Four out of five, or 80 percent, of Velcade patients were alive one year later, a significant improvement over the 66 percent of patients on high dose dexamethasone."This drug has shown itself to be superior to high-dose dexamethasone in time-to-progression, response rate and survival, with a side-effect profile that is manageable," said Paul Richardson, MD, of Dana-Farber, who led the multicenter trial. "These results provide confirmation that bortezomib should be used at first relapse, and they provide a strong rationale for its use as an upfront therapy."This year, nearly 16,000 new cases of multiple myeloma will be diagnosed in the United States and 11,300 people likely will die from the disease. In multiple myeloma, cancerous plasma cells form abnormal proteins and damage the bone marrow, bone, and other vital organs. Standard treatment with combination chemotherapy and stem-cell transplants achieves responses, but myeloma remains incurable.The use of both drugs in the study was associated with serious adverse events, and nearly one-third of patients discontinued one or the other drug because of side effects. Richardson, who is also an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, said that bortezomib has an importantly different side effect profile compared to high-dose dexamethasone. The researchers have developed strategies to reduce the drug's adverse effects, such as peripheral neuropathy, but , he adds that bortezomib-treated patients do not experience some of the very challenging problems associated with high dose dexamethasone, including glucose intolerance, weight gain and mood swings.Bortezomib is the first of a new type of cancer drug designed to attack cancer cells by blocking the proteasome, a mechanism by which cells eliminate abnormal proteins. The drug, sold as Velcade by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of Cambridge, Mass., was extensively studied preclinically for the treatment of myeloma by Teru Hideshima MD PhD, and other investigators at Dana-Farber's Jerome Lipper Multiple Myeloma Center, under the directorship of Kenneth Anderson MD. Richardson and Anderson then helped design and lead the first pivotal Phase II clinical trial completed in 2001, as well as this subsequent confirmatory study.Millennium won initial accelerated Food and Drug Administration approval of Velcade for relapsed and refractory myeloma in 2003, well before this Phase III trial was completed in 2004. In March of this year, the FDA granted full approval of Velcade for myeloma patients who have received at least one prior therapy.Richardson is first author of the NEJM report and Anderson is senior author. Other authors are from medical centers in the United States, Canada, Israel and Europe, and from Millennium Pharmaceuticals.The study was supported in part by funding from Millennium Pharmaceuticals.Dana-Farber Cancer Institute is a principal teaching affiliate of the Harvard Medical School and is among the leading cancer research and care centers in the United States. It is a founding member of the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (DF/HCC), designated a comprehensive cancer center by the National Cancer Institute.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.323 · 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.

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Biology & TherapySame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207