scholarly journals Monoclonal Antibodies versus Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors in Combination with Bortezomib or Lenalidomide plus Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: An Indirect-Comparison Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanhua Zheng ◽  
Hongyuan Shen ◽  
Li Xu ◽  
Juan Feng ◽  
Hailong Tang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Histone Deacetylase ◽  
Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Grade 3

During the past decades, agents with novel mechanisms of action, such as monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) and histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACis) have been applied to treat relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The treatment outcomes of MAbs versus HDACi in combination with bortezomib or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone remain unknown. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare indirectly the efficacy and safety of MAbs and HDACis in combination with bortezomib or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone. Six trials (eight articles) were included in the meta-analysis with 3270 RRMM patients enrolled. We synthesized hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), risk ratios (RRs) for complete response (CR),very good partial response (VGPR), overall response (OR), progressive disease plus stable disease (PD + SD) and common at least grade 3 adverse events, and their corresponding 95%confidence intervals (95% CI). Treatment with MAbs in combination with bortezomib or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone resulted in longer PFS (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.66–0.98), fewer incidences of at least grade 3 thrombocytopenia (RR 0.35, 95% CI: 0.23–0.53), neutropenia (RR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51–0.96), and sense of fatigue (RR 0.37, 95% CI: 0.17–0.82) than HDACis. The daratumumab plus bortezomib or lenalidomide and dexamethasone might significantly improve PFS in comparison with HDACis plus bortezomib or lenalidomide and dexamethasone (HR 0.55, 95% CI: 0.40–0.74). In conclusion, MAbs may be superior to HDACis in achieving longer PFS and may be better tolerated when in combination therapy with bortezomib or lenalidomide plus dexamethasone.

scholarly journals Comparison of monoclonal antibodies targeting CD38, SLAMF7 and PD-1/PD-L1 in combination with Bortezomib/Immunomodulators plus dexamethasone/prednisone for the treatment of multiple myeloma: an indirect-comparison Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wu Ye ◽  
Xia Wu ◽  
Xiaoyan Liu ◽  
Xue Zheng ◽  
Jili Deng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background Many clinical trials have assessed the effect and safety of monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) in combination with proteasome inhibitors or immunomodulators plus dexamethasone/prednisone for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM). The treatment outcomes of comparing different MAbs in combination with the above-mentioned agents remained unclear. We performed the meta-analysis to indirectly compare the effect and safety of MAbs targeting CD38, SLAMF7, and PD-1/PD-L1 in combination with bortezomib/immunomodulators plus dexamethasone/prednisone for patients with MM. Methods We searched thoroughly in the databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which at least one of the three MAbs were included. We included eleven eligible RCTs with 5367 patients in the meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was carried out using StataMP14 and Indirect Treatment Comparisons software. Results We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and relative risk (RR) for overall response rate, complete response (CR) or better, very good partial response (VGPR) or better, VGPR, partial response, stable disease, and grade 3 or higher adverse events among the three groups. The HRs for PFS of the CD38 group vs SLAMF7 group, CD38 group vs PD-1/PD-L1 group, and SLAMF7 group vs PD-1/PD-L1 group were 0.662 (95%CI 0.543–0.806), 0.317 (95%CI 0.221–0.454), and 0.479 (95%CI 0.328–0.699), respectively. The HR for OS of the CD38 group vs SLAMF7 group was 0.812 (95%CI 0.584–1.127). The RR for CR or better in the CD38 group vs SLAMF7 group was 2.253 (95%CI 1.284–3.955). The RR for neutropenia of the CD38 group vs SLAMF7 group was 1.818 (95%CI 1.41–2.344). Conclusions Treatment with the CD38 group had longer PFS and better treatment response than that with the SLAMF7 or PD-1/PD-L1 group. In addition, the SLAMF7 group prolonged PFS compared with the PD-1/PD-L1 group and was associated with a lower incidence of grade 3 or higher neutropenia than the CD38 and PD-1/PD-L1 group. In conclusion, MAbs targeting CD38 are the best, followed by those targeting SLAMF7; MAbs targeting PD-1/PD-L1 are the worst when in combination with bortezomib/immunomodulators plus dexamethasone/prednisone for the treatment of MM.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcome of Bortezomib Retreatment in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae-Sook Ahn ◽  
Sung-Hoon Jung ◽  
Seung-Shin Lee ◽  
Seo-Yeon Ahn ◽  
Deok-Hwan Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Sensory Neuropathy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Peripheral Sensory ◽  
Good Partial Response

This retrospective study investigated the clinical efficacy and safety of bortezomib retreatment in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). A total of 30 patients who relapsed or progressed after≥6 months since the last dose of their previous bortezomib therapy were included in this study. During the median 6 cycles (range: 2–12) of bortezomib retreatment, 10 (33.3%), 2 (6.7%), and 6 (20.0%) patients achieved complete response, very good partial response, and partial response, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (47.0%), thrombocytopenia (43.0%), anemia (10.0%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (3.0%) were observed. The median time to progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 5.8 months (95% CI: 2.6–9.0), 5.5 months (95% CI: 4.2–6.8), and 13.4 months (95% CI: 6.1–20.7), respectively. Patients who received bortezomib retreatment≥12 months from initial last therapy had a 1-year OS rate of 65.8% (95% CI: 43.5–88.1) while patients receiving retreatment after 6–12 months interval had a 1-year OS rate of 41.7% (95% CI: 13.9–69.5) (P=0.038). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that retreatment with bortezomib is an effective strategy for patients with MM who relapsed at a long interval after initial bortezomib therapy.

scholarly journals Risk of Serious Infections with Lenalidomide Based Regimens in Multiple Myeloma: A Network Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 12-12
Author(s):  
Nayab Mirza ◽  
Anum Javaid ◽  
Muhammad Ashar Ali ◽  
Wajeeha Aiman ◽  
Muhammad Yasir Anwar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Serious Infections ◽  
Grade 3

Background: Lenalidomide is an immune modulator, approved for use since 2005 for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Its use is associated with an increased risk of infections. Combination of lenalidomide with other drugs, monoclonal antibodies, proteasome inhibitors, dexamethasone, and alkylators, can enhance the risk of serious infections. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the incidence of ≥Grade 3 infections among lenalidomide based regimens used in MM that can help clinicians to monitor patients for the risk of infections. Methods: A search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science. We used the following keywords, "lenalidomide" AND "multiple myeloma" from the inception of literature till 06/10/2020. We screened 14,684 articles and included 23 randomized clinical trials (RCT) (N=11,174) in network meta-analysis. We extracted the data for serious (≥Grade 3) infections in lenalidomide based regimens. We excluded case reports, case series, preclinical trials, non-randomized clinical trials, observational studies, review articles, meta-analysis, and RCTs not providing any information about ≥Grade 3 infections. We used the "netmeta" package by Rucker et al. in the R programming language (version 4.0.2) to conduct frequentist network meta-analysis. Results: In 23 RCTs, the median age was ≥65years in 11 RCTs (N=5585) and ≤65 in 12 RCTs (5589). 9 RCTs were performed on relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients (N=4254), while 13 RCTs were performed on newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (N=6920). Lenalidomide regimen was used as maintenance therapy in 8 RCT (N=4255). Table 1 reviews the baseline characteristics. The pooled incidence of high-grade infections in trials with a median age of ≥65 and ≤65 years is 1010/5585 and 634/5589, respectively. The incidence of high-grade infections is 693/4254 in RRMM patients, 951/6920 in NDMM patients, and 466/4255 in NDMM patients with maintenance therapy. P-score in table 2 represents the mean extent of certainty with which a regimen is better in terms of the incidence of high-grade infections, i.e., higher P-score means a lower risk of serious infections. According to P-score, lenalidomide with carfilzomib and dexamethasone is worst in terms of the incidence of infections. Indirect comparison of placebo with lenalidomide shows a risk ratio of high-grade infections of 2.87 (95% CI: 1.96; 4.23) in favor of placebo. Fig 1 outlines the indirect comparison of the incidence of high-grade infections with different lenalidomide based regimens vs. placebo. Table 3. shows the calculated indirect comparison of high-grade infections in each lenalidomide based regimen. Heterogeneity was not statistically significant. For serious infections, lenalidomide dexamethasone showed a risk ratio of 0.86, 0.70*, 0.76*, 0.78*, 0.77, and 0.77 in comparison with the combination of lenalidomide dexamethasone with bortezomib, carfilzomib, daratumumab, elotuzumab, ixazomib, and pembrolizumab respectively (*statistically significant). Conclusion: This network meta-analysis suggests an increase in the risk of high-grade infections with the addition of bortezomib, monoclonal antibodies, ixazomib, and carfilzomib to lenalidomide in multiple myeloma patients with the highest increase in risk with the addition of carfilzomib. Additional randomized clinical trials are needed on the toxicity of lenalidomide based regimens to confirm these results. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Safety and efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (4) ◽  
pp. 772-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Richardson ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Mohamad Hussein ◽  
James Berenson ◽  
Seema Singhal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Prior Treatment ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Lenalidomide plus dexamethasone is effective for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM); however, toxicities from dexamethasone can be dose limiting. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide monotherapy in patients with relapsed and refractory MM. Patients (N = 222) received lenalidomide 30 mg/day once daily (days 1-21 every 28 days) until disease progression or intolerance. Response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), and safety were assessed. Overall, 67% of patients had received 3 or more prior treatment regimens. Partial response or better was reported in 26% of patients, with minimal response 18%. There was no difference between patients who had received 2 or fewer versus 3 or more prior treatment regimens (45% vs 44%, respectively). Median values for TTP, PFS, and OS were 5.2, 4.9, and 23.2 months, respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (60%), thrombocytopenia (39%), and anemia (20%), which proved manageable with dose reduction. Grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia occurred in 4% of patients. Lenalidomide monotherapy is active in relapsed and refractory MM with acceptable toxicities. These data support treatment with single-agent lenalidomide, as well as its use in steroid-sparing combination approaches. The study is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00065351.

scholarly journals Role of Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors in Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Focus on Vorinostat and Panobinostat

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 1173-1188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salma Afifi ◽  
Angela Michael ◽  
Mahshid Azimi ◽  
Mabel Rodriguez ◽  
Nikoletta Lendvai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Histone Deacetylase ◽  
Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of daratumumab in the treatment of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 030006052110381
Author(s):  
Yin Wang ◽  
Yanqing Li ◽  
Ye Chai
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Library Science ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Combination Regimens

Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of combination regimens containing daratumumab in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Methods A systematic search of publications listed on electronic databases (PubMed®, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct and Web of Science) between inception and 13 November 2020 was conducted to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included patients with MM that were treated with combination regimens containing daratumumab. Results A total of seven RCTs were included ( n = 4268 patients). Meta-analysis showed that compared with the control group, the group containing daratumumab showed a significantly better overall response rate and a complete response or better. Daratumumab improved efficacy in both standard-risk and cytogenetically high-risk patients with MM. The prevalence of neutropenia (≥grade 3) and pneumonia was significantly higher in the daratumumab group compared with the control group. Conclusion The available evidence demonstrated that the clinical application of combination regimens containing daratumumab improved the efficacy in patients with MM and had acceptable safety.

scholarly journals Daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: extended follow-up of POLLUX, a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study

Leukemia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 1875-1884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nizar J. Bahlis ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Darrell J. White ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
Gordon Cook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Line Of Therapy

Abstract In POLLUX, daratumumab (D) plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 63% and increased the overall response rate (ORR) versus Rd in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Updated efficacy and safety after >3 years of follow-up are presented. Patients (N = 569) with ≥1 prior line received Rd (lenalidomide, 25 mg, on Days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle; dexamethasone, 40 mg, weekly) ± daratumumab at the approved dosing schedule. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed by next-generation sequencing. After 44.3 months median follow-up, D-Rd prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat population (median 44.5 vs 17.5 months; HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35–0.55; P < 0.0001) and in patient subgroups. D-Rd demonstrated higher ORR (92.9 vs 76.4%; P < 0.0001) and deeper responses, including complete response or better (56.6 vs 23.2%; P < 0.0001) and MRD negativity (10–5; 30.4 vs 5.3%; P < 0.0001). Median time to next therapy was prolonged with D-Rd (50.6 vs 23.1 months; HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.31–0.50; P < 0.0001). Median PFS on subsequent line of therapy (PFS2) was not reached with D-Rd versus 31.7 months with Rd (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.42–0.68; P < 0.0001). No new safety concerns were reported. These data support using D-Rd in patients with RRMM after first relapse.

Phase I-II Trial of Oral Cyclophosphamide, Prednisone and Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) (CPR) for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 1723-1723
Author(s):  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
Esther Masih-Khan ◽  
Arooj Khan ◽  
Peter Anglin ◽  
Christine Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Oral Cyclophosphamide ◽  
Varicella Zoster ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Dose Levels

Abstract Oral cyclophosphamide and prednisone is a convenient regimen in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM), with a partial response (PR) rate of 40% and median progression-free survival of 19 months in our retrospective analysis of patients in first or second relapse after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) (Trieu Y, et al, Mayo Clin Proc2005; 80: 1582). We sought to enhance the efficacy of this regimen by adding oral lenalidomide (Revlimid®), a potent anti-myeloma agent, in a phase I-II trial. The CPR regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide on days 1, 8 and 15, lenalidomide on days 1–21, and prednisone 100 mg every other day in a 28-day cycle. ASA 81 mg/day was given to all patients (pts) as prophylaxis for DVT. Three dose levels were evaluated using a 3 by 3 dose escalation design. Between 11/2007–07/2008, 15 pts with relapsed/refractory MM were entered onto study. Median age was 60 (45–78) years and 60% were male. Immunoglobulin subtype was IgGκ:λ in 10:1; IgA κ:λ in 2:1 and κ light chain in 1. Median number of prior regimens was 2 (1–3) and 14 had undergone previous ASCT, including double transplants in 2 pts. Prior therapy also included thalidomide in 3 (20%) and bortezomib in 6 (40%). FISH cytogenetics were available in 9, but none had 13q deletion, t(4;14) or p53 deletion. At the time of protocol entry, median β2-microglobulin level was 222 (92–325) nm/L, albumin 38 (35–46) g/L, creatinine 78 (50–100) μmol/L, platelet count 230 (93–318) x 109/L and ANC 2.5 (1.9–9.0) x 109/L. Protocol treatment is summarized in Table 1. Dose level N Cyclophosphamide dose (mg/m2) Lenalidomide dose (mg) Prednisone dose (mg) Median # cycles given 1 3 150 15 100 9 2 3 150 25 100 6 3 6 300 25 100 4 3 (expanded) 3 300 25 100 1 Dose limiting toxicity was not observed during cycle 1 at any of the dose levels and the maximum tolerated dose of this regimen has not yet been reached at the highest dose level planned; all pts remain on active therapy. Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia was seen in 1 pt (cohort 2) and neutropenia in 4 pts (1 in cohort 1, 1 in cohort 2 and 2 in cohort 3) and were managed with dose reduction and/or growth factor support. No episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred in any pt. Only 1 pt experienced varicella zoster; routine antiviral prophylaxis was not used. Other grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities were uncommon and included abdominal pain/bacteremia in 1 pt in cohort 1, hypokalemia in 1 pt in cohort 2, and DVT in 1 pt in cohort 3. Mild grade 1/2 constipation (47%), muscle cramps (33%) and fatigue (33%) were also noted. To date, best response includes the following: dose level 1 (1 near complete remission [nCR], 2 PR); dose level 2 (3 PR); dose level 3 (4 PR, 2 minimal response [MR]); expanded cohort 3 (1 MR, 2 too early). We conclude: 1) the combination of full doses of the agents in CPR can be given in a 28-day cycle with minimal toxicity; 2) the overall response rate (nCR + PR + MR) in 13 evaluable pts to date is 87%; 3) no pts have progressed in this preliminary analysis; 4) longer follow-up is required to assess the long-term efficacy of this regimen.

Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy of Melphalan-Prednisone-Bortezomib Relative to Melphalan-Prednisone-Thalidomide and Melphalan-Prednisone for the First Line Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 2367-2367
Author(s):  
Yating Yeh ◽  
James Chambers ◽  
Sabine Gaugris ◽  
Jeroen Jansen
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Relative Efficacy ◽  
First Line ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Melphalan-prednisone (MP) combination has been considered a standard of care for front line treatment of multiple myeloma in patients non eligible for transplant. Melphalan-prednisone-bortezomib (MPV) combination has been approved in the United States in patients non eligible for high-dose chemotherapy (HD-C) and has recently received a positive opinion from the CHMP in Europe. Melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) was approved in Europe in patients &gt;65 or not eligible for HD-C. There is no head-to-head trial directly comparing MPV to MPT. The objective of the current study was to compare the efficacy of MPV to MP and MPT as first line treatment of multiple myeloma in patients non eligible for transplant. Six randomized placebo controlled trials investigating the efficacy of MPT (5) and MPV (1) relative to MP were identified with a systematic literature review. The endpoints of interest were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and overall and complete response. Relative efficacy estimates of MPT versus MP as obtained from the MPT-MP trials were combined with meta-analysis techniques and simultaneously indirectly compared with the relative efficacy of MPV versus MP from the MPV-MP trial (VISTA). This adjusted indirect comparison was performed with Bayesian fixed and random effects models. As compared to frequentist approach, Bayesian meta-analysis offers a more informative summary of the likely value of efficacy after observing the data and allows for direct probabilistic inferences. Of the three interventions compared, there was an 81% probability that MPV was the most efficacious intervention in terms of overall response and a &gt;99% probability in terms of complete response. With MPV a patient was two times more likely to show a complete response than with MPT (Relative Risk=2.15; 95%Credible Interval (CrI): 0.99–4.45). Both MPV and MPT showed greater OS than MP (HR=0.61; 95%CrI: 0.42–0.88 and HR=0.61; 95%CrI: 0.47–0.78 respectively); the indirect comparison showed similar efficacy in terms of OS between MPV and MPT (MPV vs MPT: Hazard Ratio=1.00; 95%CrI 0.64–1.57). Both MPV and MPT also displayed greater PFS than MP (MPV versus MP: HR=0.61; 95%CrI 0.49–0.76 and MPT versus MP HR=0.51; 95%CrI 0.41–0.63 respectively) and showed similar efficacy (MPV vs MPT: HR=1.19; 95%CrI: 0.87–1.63). In this study, both MPV and MPT are more efficacious than MP in terms of response, PFS and OS. MPV is expected to result in a greater complete and overall response than MPT. No difference in OS or PFS was displayed. Further analyses will need to be undertaken once evidence base data is more mature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document