MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408781448 · doi:10.1182/blood.2024027620

Daratumumab-bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone for newly diagnosed myeloma: CASSIOPEIA minimal residual disease results

2025· article· en· W4408781448 on OpenAlexaff
Jill Corre, Laure Vincent, Philippe Moreau, Benjamin Hébraud, Cyrille Hulin, Marie C. Béné, Annemiek Broijl, Denis Caillot, Michel Delforge, Thomas Dejoie, Thierry Façon, Jérôme Lambert, Xavier Leleu, Margaret Macro, Aurore Perrot, Sonja Zweegman, Thomas Filleron, Bastien Cabarrou, Niels W.C.J. van de Donk, Sabrina Mahéo, Winnie Hua, Jianping Wang, Maria Krevvata, Véronique Vanquickelberghe, Carla de Boer, Alba Tuozzo, Fredrik Borgsten, Melissa Rowe, Soraya Wuillème, Pieter Sonneveld

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
FundersCelgeneNational Cancer InstituteKite PharmaYale UniversitySanofiServierAmgenPfizerEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsDaratumumabMedicineInternal medicineBortezomibMinimal residual diseaseMultiple myelomaThalidomideOncologySurgeryGastroenterologyBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Previous results from CASSIOPEIA demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity with the addition of daratumumab to bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTd) induction/consolidation and with daratumumab maintenance vs observation in transplant-eligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Here, we present long-term MRD status and PFS outcomes after a median follow-up of 80.1 months. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to daratumumab plus VTd (D-VTd) or VTd induction/consolidation; patients remaining on study were rerandomized to daratumumab maintenance or observation for ≤2 years. MRD status was assessed at predefined time points during each study phase. D-VTd improved overall MRD-negativity rates (10-5) after induction (34.6% vs 23.1%) and consolidation (63.7% vs 43.7%) and provided PFS benefit, regardless of postinduction MRD status, vs VTd alone. Daratumumab maintenance improved overall MRD-negativity rates over observation, regardless of induction/consolidation treatment (D-VTd/daratumumab vs D-VTd/observation, 10-5 [77.3% vs 70.7%] and 10-6 [60.7% vs 52.0%]; VTd/daratumumab vs VTd/observation, 10-5 [70.9% vs 51.2%] and 10-6 [48.4% vs 30.7%]) and improved MRD-negativity rates, regardless of risk status, as defined by cytogenetic abnormalities or the revised International Staging System score. Furthermore, daratumumab maintenance provided PFS benefit vs observation, regardless of induction/consolidation treatment and postconsolidation MRD status. D-VTd followed by daratumumab maintenance consistently produced the highest landmark, cumulative, and sustained MRD-negativity rates (10-5 and 10-6), translating to superior long-term PFS outcomes. These results demonstrate that daratumumab-based induction/consolidation followed by daratumumab maintenance resulted in the deepest and most durable MRD negativity, leading to superior PFS outcomes. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02541383.

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)0.002
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations21
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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