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

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61988987%3A17110%2F21%3AA22029N9" target="_blank" >RIV/61988987:17110/21:A22029N9 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/61989592:15110/21:73608331 RIV/00216208:11150/21:10420675 RIV/00669806:_____/21:10420675 RIV/00216208:11120/21:43920965 and 8 more

Result on the web

<a href="https://bmccancer.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12885-020-07732-1.pdf" target="_blank" >https://bmccancer.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12885-020-07732-1.pdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07732-1" target="_blank" >10.1186/s12885-020-07732-1</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

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

Original language description

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.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30204 - Oncology

Project

Result was created during the realization of more than one project. More information in the Projects tab.

Continuities

V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Publication year

2021

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

BMC CANCER

ISSN

1471-2407

e-ISSN

1471-2407

Volume of the periodical

21

Issue of the periodical within the volume

1

Country of publishing house

GB - UNITED KINGDOM

Number of pages

13

Pages from-to

—

UT code for WoS article

000610557500001

EID of the result in the Scopus database

—