MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P933: DARATUMUMAB (D) IN COMBINATION WITH VD OR D-RD IN RELAPSED OR REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMA: SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF CASTOR AND POLLUX STUDIES IN PATIENTS WITH EARLY OR LATE RELAPSE AFTER INITIAL THERAPY

2022· article· en· W4283372513 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Spencer, P. Moreau, MV Mateos, H. Goldschmidt, Kounosuke Suzuki, Mark‐David Levin, Pieter Sonneveld, Seungho Yoon, S. Z. Usmani, Katja Weisel, Donna Reece, Tahamtan Ahmadi, Huiling Pei, Wendy Garvin Mayo, X. Gai, Jodi Carey, Robin Carson, Meletios Α. Dimopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueHemaSphere · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLenalidomideDaratumumabClinical endpointOncologyDexamethasoneSubgroup analysisClinical trialConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High-risk multiple myeloma (MM) is often defined based on cytogenetic abnormalities (ie, t[4;14], t[14;16], and/or del17p); however, patients who relapse early (12-18 months) after initial therapy are considered a functional high-risk group that is also associated with poor prognosis. Daratumumab (DARA), a human IgGk monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, is approved in combination with standard-of-care regimens for MM. In the phase 3 CASTOR and POLLUX studies, DARA in combination with bortezomib plus dexamethasone (D-Vd) and lenalidomide plus dexamethasone (D-Rd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), regardless of cytogenetic risk, and achieved higher rates of complete response or better (≥CR) and minimal residual disease (MRD)–negativity vs Vd or Rd alone in patients with RRMM. Aims: In this post-hoc analyses of CASTOR and POLLUX we evaluated D-Vd vs Vd and D-Rd vs Rd in patient subgroups with 1 prior line of therapy based on timing of relapse (early or late) after initiation of the first line of therapy. Methods: In CASTOR and POLLUX, patients with RRMM and ≥1 prior line of therapy were randomized to D-Vd/Vd or D-Rd/Rd, respectively. The primary endpoint was PFS. In this analysis, the early relapse subgroup included patients with 1 prior line of therapy who relapsed <18 months after initiating their first line of therapy; patients with 1 prior line of therapy who relapsed ≥18 months after initiating their first line of therapy were included in the late relapse subgroup. Results: 49 and 186 patients from CASTOR and 99 and 196 patients from POLLUX were included in the early relapse and late relapse subgroups, respectively. Median follow-up was 72.6 months (CASTOR) and 79.7 months (POLLUX). PFS consistently favored the DARA-containing regimens across subgroups (Table). In CASTOR, ≥CR rates were higher with D-Vd vs Vd in the early relapse (21% vs 17%; P = 0.7360) and late relapse (51% vs 14%; P <0.0001) subgroups. In POLLUX, ≥CR rates were higher with D-Rd vs Rd in the early relapse (53% vs 12%; P <0.0001) and late relapse (62% vs 38%; P = 0.0012) subgroups. MRD-negativity rates (10–5) were higher with D-Vd/D-Rd vs Vd/Rd regardless of relapse timing (CASTOR: early, 13% vs 0%; P = 0.1476; late, 23% vs 3%; P <0.0001; POLLUX: early, 30% vs 4%; P = 0.0006; late, 34% vs 14%; P = 0.0009). Image:Summary/Conclusion: These post hoc analyses of CASTOR and POLLUX showed PFS and depth of response benefits of DARA-containing regimens in patients with 1 prior line of therapy, regardless of relapse timing (early or late). Our results support the use of D-Vd and D-Rd in RRMM, including in patients who are considered functional high risk.

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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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