MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P864: A PHASE 1 STUDY OF BELANTAMAB MAFODOTIN IN COMBINATION WITH STANDARD OF CARE IN NEWLY DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA: AN INTERIM ANALYSIS OF DREAMM-9

2023· article· en· W4385727291 on OpenAlexaff
Saad Z. Usmani, Michał Mielnik, Ja Min Byun, Aránzazu Alonso Alonso, Al‐Ola Abdallah, Mamta Garg, Hang Quach, Chang‐Ki Min, Wojciech Janowski, E. M. Ocio San Miguel, Katja Weisel, Albert Oriol, Irwindeep Sandhu, Paula Rodríguez‐Otero, Karthik Ramasamy, Jacqueline Egger, Danaè Williams, Jie Ma, Morrys C. Kaisermann, Marek Hus

Bibliographic record

VenueHemaSphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLenalidomideMultiple myelomaInterim analysisBortezomibInternal medicineAdverse effectTolerabilityClinical endpointDexamethasoneGastroenterologyOncologySurgeryClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topic: 14. Myeloma and other monoclonal gammopathies - Clinical Background: Belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) is a B-cell maturation antigen-binding antibody-drug conjugate that eliminates myeloma cells via direct cell killing and anti-myeloma immune responses. DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is an ongoing Phase 1, randomized, dose and schedule evaluation study. Herein, we report updated interim-analysis data. Aims: DREAMM-9 aims to evaluate belamaf plus bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) in adult patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and to establish the recommended dose for future development of belamaf combination therapies in the first-line setting. Methods: Belamaf dose cohorts are shown in the Table. VRd was given every 3 weeks until cycle 8, and Rd every 4 weeks thereafter (Q3/4W). Following safety data from Cohorts 2–5, Cohorts 6–7 were opened in parallel (randomized 1:1) and have shorter follow-up (Table). Safety was the primary endpoint; efficacy and tolerability were secondary endpoints. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed by next-generation sequencing (10-5). Results: As of data cutoff (October 20, 2022), 93 patients were treated across Cohorts 1–7. Median age (range) was 73 (51–88) years, 55% of patients were male, and 84% were white. The most commonly reported non-ocular adverse events (AEs) across all cohorts were thrombocytopenia (46%), constipation (36%), diarrhea (34%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (31%). Overall, belamaf-related Grade ≥3 AEs occurred in 35% of patients and led to belamaf dose reductions in 7% and dose delays in 63% of all treated patients. Grade ≥3 ocular AEs (keratopathy and visual acuity [KVA] scale) occurred in 53% of all patients and led to dose reductions in 12% and dose delays in 52% of overall patients. Fatal AEs occurred in 7 patients, all unrelated to study treatment. Efficacy results and ocular AEs are summarized in the Table: 100% of patients responded in Cohort 1 (1.9 mg/kg Q3/4W) and Cohort 3 (1.9 mg/kg Q6/8W). Median time to very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) ranged from 2.1 to 3.1 months across cohorts. Highest MRD negativity rates (≥VGPR) were seen in Cohort 1 (83%) and Cohort 3 (67%). Summary/Conclusion: This updated interim analysis demonstrates that belamaf plus VRd has no new safety signals and provides early and deep anti-myeloma responses in patients with transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, with high MRD negativity rates. Funding: GSK (Study 209664); drug linker technology licensed from Seagen Inc.; monoclonal antibody produced using POTELLIGENT Technology licensed from BioWa. This abstract was previously submitted to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, June 2–6, 2023, and is submitted on behalf of the original authors with their permission. ©2023 American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. Reused with permission. All rights reserved. Table. Efficacy and Safety Summary - Cohorts 1 1.9 mg/kg Q3/4W n=12 2 1.4 mg/kg Q6/8W n=12 3 1.9 mg/kg Q6/8W n=12 4 1.0 mg/kg Q3/4W n=15* 5 1.4 mg/kg Q3/4W n=13 6 1.4 mg/kg then 1.0 mg/kg Q9/12W n=14 7 1.9 mg/kg then 1.4 mg/kg Q9/12W n=15* Grade ≥3 ocular AEs (KVA; N=91), % 83 58 92 57 85 7 0 Median follow-up, months 27.6 16.0 16.2 15.3 15.2 2.5 2.0 ORR, % ≥CR VGPR PR MR/SD 100751780 9283808 100831700 80532077 92622380 791421437 53727207 MRD[-], % ≥CR ≥VGPR 7583 3333 5867 3333 4646 714 07 *Safety population n=14. AEs, adverse events; CR, complete response; KVA, keratopathy and visual acuity scale; MR, minor response; MRD, minimal residual disease; ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival; PR, partial response; Q, every; SD, stable disease; VGPR, very good partial response; W, weeks. Keywords: Multiple myeloma, Phase I, Minimal residual disease (MRD), B-cell maturation antigen

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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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