首页> 外文OA文献 >Survival benefit of ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRD) over lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in routine clinical practice
【2h】

Survival benefit of ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRD) over lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in routine clinical practice

机译:在常规临床实践中复发和难治多骨髓瘤(RD)对Lenalalomide和地塞米松(IRD)的肝氮杂胺和地塞米松(IRD)的生存益处

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Abstract Background We have performed a head to head comparison of all-oral triplet combination of ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRD) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (RD) in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the routine clinical practice. Methods A total of 344 patients treated with IRD (N = 127) or RD (N = 217) were selected for analysis from the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies (RMG). Descriptive statistics were used to assess patient’s characteristics associated with the respective therapy. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS), secondary end points included response rates and overall survival (OS). Survival endpoints were plotted using Kaplan-Meier methodology at 95% Greenwood confidence interval. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the effect of treatment regimens and the significance of uneven variables. Statistical tests were performed at significance level 0.05. Results In the whole cohort, median PFS for IRD was 17.5 and for RD was 11.5 months favoring the all-oral triplet, p = 0.005; in patients within relapse 1–3, the median PFS was 23.1 vs 11.6 months, p = 0.001. The hazard ratio for PFS was 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51–0.89, p = 0.006). The PFS advantage translated into improved OS for patients treated with IRD, median 36.6 months vs 26.0 months (p = 0.008). The overall response rate (ORR) was 73.0% in the IRD group vs 66.2% in the RD group with a complete response rate (CR) of 11.1% vs 8.8%, and very good partial response (VGPR) 22.2% vs 13.9%, IRD vs RD respectively. The IRD regimen was most beneficial in patients ≤75 years with ISS I, II, and in the first and second relapse. Patients with the presence of extramedullary disease did not benefit from IRD treatment (median PFS 6.5 months). Both regimens were well tolerated, and the incidence of total as well as grade 3/4 toxicities was comparable. Conclusions Our analysis confirms the results of the TOURMALINE-MM1 study and shows benefit of all-oral triplet IRD treatment versus RD doublet. It demonstrates that the addition of ixazomib to RD improves key survival endpoints in patients with RRMM in a routine clinical setting.
机译:摘要背景我们已经进行了一个头伊克昔佐米,患者在日常临床实践复发和难治性多发性骨髓瘤(RRMM)与来那度胺和地塞米松(RD)来那度胺和地塞米松(IRD)的所有口腔三重组合的头比较。方法与IRD(N = 127)或RD(N = 217)处理过的总共344名患者选择用于从单克隆丙种球蛋白病的捷克注册表(RMG)分析。描述性统计用来评估与相应的治疗相关的患者的特征。主要终点是无进展存活(PFS),包括响应率和总生存率(OS)的次要终点。生存终点采用Kaplan-Meier方法在95%格林伍德置信区间作图。单变量和多变量Cox比例风险模型被用来评估治疗方案的效果和不均匀变量的意义。统计检验在显着性水平0.05进行。结果在整个队列,为IRD中位PFS是17.5和RD 11.5个月利于所有口服三重峰,p值= 0.005;在复发1-3内的患者,中位PFS为23.1 VS11.6个月,p值= 0.001。对PFS的危险比为0.67(95%置信区间[CI] 0.51-0.89,P = 0.006)。的PFS优点转化为改进的OS用于与IRD治疗的患者,中位36.6个月VS26.0个月(p值= 0.008)。总反应率(ORR)为73.0%,在IRD组与在RD组中66.2%与完全缓解率的11.1%(CR)对8.8%,以及非常好的部分响应(VGPR)22.2%比13.9%, IRD VS RD分别。税务局方案为患者ISS I,II,≤75岁,在第一和第二次复发最有利的。患者髓外疾病的存在并没有从IRD治疗(中位PFS6.5个月)受益。这两种方案均耐受良好,总的发病率以及3/4级毒性反应是可比较的。结论:我们的分析证实了电气石MM1研究的结果,并显示有利于所有口服三联治疗IRD与RD双重的。这表明,除了伊克昔佐米对RD改善患者的RRMM关键的生存终点在临床常规。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号