MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414948966 · doi:10.1080/14796694.2025.2557174

A plain language summary of LocoMMotion – an observational study of treatments used for pretreated multiple myeloma

2025· article· en· W4414948966 on OpenAlexaff
Michel Delforge, Eilidh Duncan, María-Victoria Mateos, Imène Haddad, Wafae Iraki, Silva Koskinen, Jozefien Buyze, Philippe Moreau, Kate Morgan, Katja Weisel

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
FundersLegend Biotech
KeywordsObservational studyMultiple myelomaPlain languageMEDLINEEnglish language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plain Language SummaryWhat is this summary about?This is a Plain Language Summary of Publication of the LocoMMotion study, an observational study in which researchers monitored patients living with multiple myeloma and the treatments that they received in real-world clinical practice. LocoMMotion studied patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who were triple-class exposed. The researchers wanted to find out how well patients responded to different types of treatment over a 2-year follow-up period.What were the results?In total, 248 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma were enrolled in the study from August 2, 2019 until October 26, 2020. During the study, 91 different types of treatment were used, which shows the lack of standard treatment for patients with triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Nearly one third of patients (31.9%) had a positive response (i.e. the number of tumor cells reduced), to the first treatment they received after enrolling in this study. Half of patients responded to treatment for at least 7.4 months.Overall, half of patients in the study remained alive for at least 13.8 months. Just over half of the patient group (53.4%) were alive one year into the study. Overall, 63.7% of patients did not survive during the study, mainly due to their cancer getting worse, which occurred in 67.7% of these cases. In total, 8.5% of patients had at least one side effect that resulted in death, most commonly due to infections (5.2%). Based on responses to a questionnaire about their treatment and symptoms,patients said that the current treatments did not noticeably improve their quality of life. For example, 53.3% of patients did not have any meaningful improvement in pain during treatment.What do the results mean?In this study, most patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma did not have a long-lasting response to treatment, and many patients received subsequent therapies after the initial study therapy. Additionally, the many different treatments used show that there is not a standardized treatment for patients with triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Lastly, the quality of patients’ lives did not improve much during their treatment, which highlights the need for new treatments. LocoMMotion was an observational and non-randomized study, so may have some limitations that mean data must be interpreted carefully. Some baseline patient information and laboratory assessments may have been missing, and the study did not have a comparative group.This is an abstract of the Plain Language Summary of Publication article.View the full Plain Language Summary PDF of this article to read the full-text

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture OncologySame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207