MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P866: IDECABTAGENE VICLEUCEL (IDE-CEL) VS STANDARD REGIMENS IN PATIENTS WITH TRIPLE-CLASS–EXPOSED (TCE) RELAPSED AND REFRACTORY MULTIPLE MYELOMA (RRMM): KARMMA-3 SUBGROUP ANALYSIS BY PRIOR LINES OF THERAPY

2023· article· en· W4385697656 on OpenAlexaff
Salomon Manier, Paula Rodríguez‐Otero, María‐Victoria Mateos, Hermann Einsele, Nizar J. Bahlis, Nikhil C. Munshi, Sikander Ailawadhi, Bertrand Arnulf, Ajay K. Nooka, Ravi Vij, Ingerid Weum Abrahamsen, Annemiek Broijl, Sundar Jagannath, Reuben Benjamin, Usama Gergis, Douglas W. Sborov, Shinsuke Iida, Anna Truppel-Hartmann, Zhihong Yang, Julia Piasecki, Jasper Felten, Andrea Caia, Mark Cook, Rachid Baz

Bibliographic record

VenueHemaSphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer ResearchUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaratumumabMedicineInternal medicineRegimenOncologyMultiple myelomaLenalidomideHazard ratioConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topic: 14. Myeloma and other monoclonal gammopathies - Clinical Background: Because of earlier use of immunomodulatory (IMiD®) agents, proteasome inhibitors (PIs), and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody combinations, patients (pts) with RRMM are becoming TCE earlier in their disease course, which represents a therapeutic challenge. In the phase 3 KarMMa-3 trial (NCT03651128), ide-cel, a BCMA-directed CAR T cell therapy, significantly improved median progression-free survival (mPFS, 13.3 vs 4.4 mo; hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; P<0.0001) and overall response rate (ORR, 71% vs 42%; P<0.0001) vs standard (std) regimens in pts with TCE RRMM who received 2–4 prior lines of therapy (LoT). We assessed the consistency of ide-cel benefit vs std regimens across numbers (no.) of prior LoT in pts with TCE RRMM in KarMMa-3. Aims: To compare efficacy and safety of ide-cel vs std regimens by no. of prior LoT in KarMMa-3 pts. Methods: Pts with RRMM who received 2–4 prior LoT, were TCE (IMiD agent, PI, and daratumumab), and had disease refractory to the last regimen were randomized 2:1 to receive ide-cel (target dose range: 150–450 x 106 CAR+ T cells) or a std regimen (DPd, DVd, IRd, Kd, or EPd); randomization stratification factors included no. of prior LoT (2 vs 3 or 4). In this analysis, efficacy and safety were assessed by no. of prior LoT. An analysis was performed to determine the relationship between soluble BCMA (sBCMA) levels and prior LoT. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms across prior LoT subgroups. In both arms, the proportion of pts with triple-class–refractory (TCR) disease increased and median time to progression on last prior therapy decreased from 2 to 4 prior LoT (ide-cel: 50% to 88% and 9.3 to 5.1 mo, respectively). High-risk clinical features were generally balanced across prior LoT in each arm. At a median follow-up of 18.6 (range, 0.4–35.4) mo, PFS improvement for ide-cel vs std regimens was consistent across prior LoT (HR range, 0.45–0.58; Table). In pts with 2 and 3 or 4 prior LoT, mPFS with ide-cel was 15.1 and 12.0 mo, and with std regimens was 4.8 and 4.2 mo, respectively. The 12-mo PFS rates in the ide-cel arm were 64%, 54%, and 46% in pts with 2, 3, and 4 prior LoT, respectively. ORRs and complete response rates (CRRs) were numerically higher with ide-cel vs std regimens regardless of prior LoT. Baseline sBCMA levels were similar in pts with 2 vs 3 or 4 prior LoT in both arms; at nadir, a greater proportion of pts in the ide-cel arm with 2 vs 3 or 4 prior LoT cleared sBCMA level (82% vs 68%; P=0.0238). Proportion of pts who had serious AEs was similar in subgroups by prior LoT (ide-cel, 51–55%; std regimens, 37–39%) and to the overall population (ide-cel, 52%; std regimens, 38%). The safety profile of ide-cel, including cytokine release syndrome (CRS), was similar across prior LoT. Grade 5 CRS occurred in 1 pt each in the 2 and 3 prior LoT subgroups. Investigator-identified neurotoxicity was lowest in pts who had 2 prior LoT (2, 7%; 3 or 4, 19%). Summary/Conclusion: Across prior LoT, the benefit of ide-cel vs std regimens was maintained and the safety profile of ide-cel was consistent. With increasing LoT, pts were more likely to have TCR disease and had numerically poorer efficacy outcomes in both arms. Greater proportion of pts in the ide-cel arm with 2 vs 3 or 4 prior LoT had clearance of tumor burden as measured by sBCMA, raising the possibility of earlier ide-cel use in TCE RRMM.Keywords: Multiple myeloma, CAR-T, Clinical trial, Antigen-specific T cells

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemaSphereSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207