MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7093121128

DP114 | ISATUXIMAB, BORTEZOMIB, LENALIDOMIDE, DEXAMETHASONE IN PATIENTS WITH TRANSPLANT-INELIGIBLE NEWLY DIAGNOSED MYELOMA AND PLASMACYTOMAS: IMROZ SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

2025· article· en· W7093121128 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubgroup analysisAdverse effectHazard ratioClinical endpointMultiple myelomaCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. Isatuximab (Isa) is approved with VRd in Ti NDMM patients (pts), based on the Phase 3 IMROZ study (NCT03319667). This subgroup analysis of IMROZ compares efficacy and safety of Isa-VRd vs VRd in pts with plasmacytoma, including paramedullary and extramedullary disease (EMD). Methods. In IMROZ, 484 pts were randomized 3:2 to receive Isa-VRd (n=291) or VRd (n=193). Then Isa-Rd or Rd maintenance after 24 weeks of induction. Positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) scans were conducted at baseline and annually until PD. In pts with plasmacytoma, PET/CT scans were repeated at complete response (CR) and/or end of induction and during minimal residual disease (MRD) assessments (next generation sequencing 10-5). Responses were assessed per IMWG criteria; PFS by an independent response committee; safety using the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03. Results. Among IMROZ population, 95 (32.6%) Isa-VRd and 60 (31.1%) VRd pts had plasmacytoma; of these, 19 (20.0%) Isa-VRd and 9 (15.0%) VRd pts had EMD. At baseline, more VRd pts with plasmacytoma had estimated glomerular filtration rate of <60 mL/min/1.73 m² (38.3%) vs Isa-VRd (27.4%) and had high-risk cytogenetics, VRd (18.3%) vs Isa-VRd (12.6%). In pts with plasmacytoma, Isa-VRd led to a longer median PFS than VRd (not reached [NR] vs 47.0 months; HR 0.69 [95% CI 0.40-1.178]; p=0.5332). Similar results were observed in pts with EMD (NR vs 31.7 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.24 [95% CI 0.07-0.81]; p=0.1980). The rate of ≥CR was 67.4% for Isa-VRd and 63.3% for VRd, and corresponding overall response rates were 82.1% and 86.7% (Table). 48 (50.5%) Isa-VRd and 24 (40.0%) VRd pts achieved MRD−, while 40 (42.1%) and 14 (23.3%) had sustained MRD− at 12 months. MRD− and CR was reached in 43 (45.3%) and 23 (38.3%) of Isa-VRd and VRd pts, respectively. Treatment discontinuation rates were similar (24.2% [Isa-VRd] vs 28.3% [VRd]). Isa-VRd pts had higher grade ≥3 upper respiratory infections (2.1% vs. 0%) and pneumonia (18.9% vs. 13.3%), similar to the overall IMROZ population. Neutropenia was more common in Isa-VRd pts (34.7% vs. 15.0%), with fewer cases of peripheral neuropathy (4.2% vs.13.3%). Conclusions. Isa-VRd led to improved efficacy in pts with plasmacytoma, including EMD, achieving greater responses and longer median PFS than VRd, showed a similar safety profile in pts to that of the overall IMROZ population. No new safety signals were observed.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 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 venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→