MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415668960 · doi:10.1016/j.htct.2025.104824

DARATUMUMAB PLUS BORTEZOMIB, LENALIDOMIDE, AND DEXAMETHASONE (DVRD) IN PATIENTS WITH NEWLY DIAGNOSED MULTIPLE MYELOMA (NDMM): SUBGROUP ANALYSIS OF TRANSPLANT- INELIGIBLE (TIE) PATIENTS IN THE PHASE 3 CEPHEUS STUDY

2025· article· en· W4415668960 on OpenAlexaff
Thierry Façon, Sonja Zweegman, V Hungria, NJ Bahlis, Christopher P. Venner, Marc Braunstein, Luděk Pour, Josep Martí, Ângelo Maiolino, S. Z. Usmani

Bibliographic record

VenueHematology Transfusion and Cell Therapy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer ResearchUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiple myelomaClinical endpointDaratumumabSubgroup analysisPost-hoc analysisPopulationOverall survivalPhases of clinical researchConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After reading out of the PERSEUS and CEPHEUS trials, daratumumab-based therapy + VRd is emerging as the standard of care in NDMM treatment. In CEPHEUS (NCT03652064), DVRd improved minimal residual disease negativity (MRD neg) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs VRd in patients (pts) with TIE or transplant-deferred (TD) NDMM. As transplant deferral is not a common clinical pathway in many regions, here we report a post hoc analysis of DVRd efficacy in TIE pts. In this analysis, the primary endpoint of overall MRD neg rate (MRD neg at 10-5 and complete response or better [≥CR]), and key secondary endpoints, including PFS and sustained MRD neg (confirmed MRD neg ≥12 months [mo] apart without MRD positivity in between) were assessed. CEPHEUS enrolled pts with TIE or TD NDMM, ECOG performance status (PS) 0–2, and an International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) frailty score of 0 or 1. Pts were randomized (1:1) to DVRd or VRd. Of 395 pts, 289 were TIE (DVRd, n = 144; VRd, n = 145). TIE population baseline (BL) characteristics were generally well balanced between DVRd vs VRd. In the TIE vs intent-to-treat (ITT) population, median age was older (72 vs 70 years [y]), and a higher percentage of pts were intermediate fit per IMWG criteria (41.2% vs 35.2%). In TIE pts, overall MRD neg rate at 10−5 was 60.4% for DVRd and 39.3% for VRd (odds ratio [OR] 2.37; 95% CI 1.47–3.80; p < 0.0001); at 10−6, it was 45.8% vs 26.9% (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.40–3.73; p = 0.001). Sustained MRD neg rate (10−5) was 46.5% vs 27.6% (OR 2.27; 95% CI 1.39–3.70; p = 0.0010). Overall ≥CR rate was 80.6% vs 61.4% (OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.71–4.34; p < 0.0001). At 58.7-mo median follow-up, median PFS was NR for DVRd and 49.6 mo for VRd, and the 54-mo PFS rate was 69.0% vs 48.0% (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.35–0.74; p = 0.0003); OS favored DVRd vs VRd (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.42–1.03); after censored for deaths due to COVID-19, HR 0.55; 95% CI 0.34–0.90). Treatment effect was generally consistent across subgroups MRD neg(10-5) rate, %: DVRd, VRd: ISS Stage III (55 vs 30), Cytogenetic risk high(50 both), ECOG ≥1 (621 vs 36.4) Median PFS, mo VRd: 60.6 Stage 1 and 33.6 Stage III, Cytogenetic risk High: 31.7, Standard:60.6. ECOG 0:60.6, ECOG ≥1:47.2. Safety profile was consistent with ITT and the known profile for daratumumab subcutaneous and VRd. In CEPHEUS TIE pts, the ≥CR rate was 80.6% and overall MRD neg rate (10−5) was 60.4%, with ∼50% of pts sustaining MRD neg for ≥1 y. Nearly 70% of pts were alive and progression free at 4.5 y. These subgroup data reinforce the strong efficacy of DVRd in the TIE population.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHematology Transfusion and Cell TherapySame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207