[HTML][HTML] Daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma: three-year …

MV Mateos, P Sonneveld, V Hungria, AK Nooka… - … Myeloma and Leukemia, 2020 - Elsevier
MV Mateos, P Sonneveld, V Hungria, AK Nooka, JA Estell, W Barreto, P Corradini, CK Min…
Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma and Leukemia, 2020Elsevier
Background In the phase III CASTOR study in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma,
daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-Vd) demonstrated significant clinical
benefit versus Vd alone. Outcomes after 40.0 months of median follow-up are discussed.
Patients and Methods Eligible patients had received≥ 1 line of treatment and were
administered bortezomib (1.3 mg/m 2) and dexamethasone (20 mg) for 8 cycles with or
without daratumumab (16 mg/kg) until disease progression. Results Of 498 patients in the …
Background
In the phase III CASTOR study in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-Vd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus Vd alone. Outcomes after 40.0 months of median follow-up are discussed.
Patients and Methods
Eligible patients had received ≥ 1 line of treatment and were administered bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) and dexamethasone (20 mg) for 8 cycles with or without daratumumab (16 mg/kg) until disease progression.
Results
Of 498 patients in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (D-Vd, n = 251; Vd, n = 247), 47% had 1 prior line of treatment (1PL; D-Vd, n = 122; Vd, n = 113). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly prolonged with D-Vd versus Vd in the ITT population (16.7 vs. 7.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.40; P < .0001) and the 1PL subgroup (27.0 vs. 7.9 months; HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.15-0.32; P < .0001). In lenalidomide-refractory patients, the median PFS was 7.8 versus 4.9 months (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.28-0.68; P = .0002) for D-Vd (n = 60) versus Vd (n = 81). Minimal residual disease (MRD)–negativity rates (10−5) were greater with D-Vd versus Vd (ITT: 14% vs. 2%; 1PL: 20% vs. 3%; both P < .0001). PFS2 was significantly prolonged with D-Vd versus Vd (ITT: HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.38-0.61; 1PL: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.51; P < .0001). No new safety concerns were observed.
Conclusion
After 3 years, D-Vd maintained significant benefits in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with a consistent safety profile. D-Vd provided the greatest benefit at first relapse and increased MRD-negativity rates.
Elsevier
以上显示的是最相近的搜索结果。 查看全部搜索结果