Anti-CD38-based quadruplet versus triplet induction regimens in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Triplet induction therapy with either daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-Rd) or bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) has long been the standard of care for transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TIE-NDMM). In recent years, anti-CD38-containing quadruplet induction regimens have increasingly been adopted as frontline therapies, with studies indicating their potentials to enhance treatment responses and improve survival outcomes. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of these quadruplet regimens as initial treatment for this population. Methods We conducted a comprehensive literature search across PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to April 30, 2025. Included studies consisted of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing anti-CD38-based quadruplet induction regimens to triplet induction regimens among TIE-NDMM patients. Outcomes of interest were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), rates of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, rates of stringent complete response and complete response (sCR/CR), rates of very good partial response (VGPR) or better, overall response rates (ORR), rates of severe adverse events (SAEs), grade 3 to 4 infections, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager version 5.4.1. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and I² statistics. Results A total of six RCTs involving 2,023 patients were identified, with sample sizes ranging from 121 to 706 participants and median follow-up durations between 34 and 59.7 months. 1088 participants received quadruplet induction while 935 received triplet induction. The quadruplet regimens comprised an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (daratumumab or isatuximab), a proteasome inhibitor (bortezomib or carfilzomib), an immunomodulatory drug (lenalidomide) or alkylator (melphalan or cyclophosphamide), and a corticosteroid. Triplet regimens consisted of the same backbone without the anti-CD38 agent. Quadruplet induction regimens significantly improved PFS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39-0.61, P<0.00001, I²=56%) and OS (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.76, P<0.00001, I²=0%) compared to triplet regimens. Quadruplets were associated with enhanced rates of MRD negativity at a threshold of 10⁻⁵ (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.29-2.99, P=0.002, I²=92%), rates of sCR/CR (RR 1.46, 95% CI 1.01-1.98, P=0.02, I²=90%) and VGPR or better (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10-1.61, P=0.003, I²=88%). ORR was similar between patients receiving quadruplets and triplets (RR 1.12; 95% CI 1.00-1.26, P=0.04, I²=86%). There was a slight increase in the rates of SAEs (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01-1.29, P=0.03, I²=17%) and grade 3 to 4 infections (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.14-1.6, P=0.0004, I²=0%) associated with quadruplets. There were no significant differences in the rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97-1.74, I²=87%) and thrombocytopenia (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86-1.14, I²=0%) between the two groups. A subgroup analysis of frail patients revealed that the benefits of quadruplet therapy extend to this population, with significant improvements in both PFS (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.4-0.65, P<0.0001, I²=0%) and OS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.93, P=0.02, I²=0%). Conclusion Our study provides compelling evidence that anti-CD38-based quadruplet induction regimens are a more effective upfront treatment option compared to triplet regimens for TIE-NDMM patients, demonstrating improvements in PFS, OS, MRD negativity, rates of sCR/CR, and VGPR, with manageable safety concerns. While quadruplet regimens were associated with higher rates of SAEs and grade 3-4 infections, no significant differences were observed in the rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia or thrombocytopenia. Careful patient selection is essential to optimize outcomes and mitigate treatment-related toxicity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".