Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2445/205802
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRosiñol, Laura-
dc.contributor.authorHebraud, Benjamin-
dc.contributor.authorOriol, Albert-
dc.contributor.authorColin, Anne Laurène-
dc.contributor.authorRíos Tamayo, Rafael-
dc.contributor.authorHulin, Cyrille-
dc.contributor.authorBlanchard, María Jesús-
dc.contributor.authorCaillot, Denis-
dc.contributor.authorSureda, Anna-
dc.contributor.authorHernández, Miguel Teodoro-
dc.contributor.authorArnulf, Bertrand-
dc.contributor.authorMateos, Maria Victoria-
dc.contributor.authorMacro, Margaret-
dc.contributor.authorSan Miguel, Jesús-
dc.contributor.authorBelhadj, Karim-
dc.contributor.authorLahuerta, Juan José-
dc.contributor.authorGarelik, M. Brigid-
dc.contributor.authorBladé, Joan-
dc.contributor.authorMoreau, Philippe-
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-16T22:20:28Z-
dc.date.available2024-01-16T22:20:28Z-
dc.date.issued2023-11-02-
dc.identifier.issn2234-943X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2445/205802-
dc.description.abstractObjectiveProviding the most efficacious frontline treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) is critical for patient outcomes. No direct comparisons have been made between bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (VRD) and bortezomib + thalidomide + dexamethasone (VTD) induction regimens in transplant-eligible NDMM.MethodsAn integrated analysis was performed using patient data from four trials meeting prespecified eligibility criteria: two using VRD (PETHEMA GEM2012 and IFM 2009) and two using VTD (PETHEMA GEM2005 and IFM 2013-04).ResultsThe primary endpoint was met, with VRD demonstrating a noninferior rate of at least very good partial response (>= VGPR) after induction vs VTD. GEM comparison demonstrated improvement in the >= VGPR rate after induction for VRD vs VTD (66.3% vs 51.2%; P = .00281) that increased after transplant (74.4% vs 53.5%). Undetectable minimal residual disease rates post induction (46.7% vs 34.9%) and post transplant (62.4% vs 47.3%) support the benefit of VRD vs VTD. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study and/or treatment discontinuation were less frequent with VRD (3%, GEM2012; 6%, IFM 2009) vs VTD (11%, IFM 2013-04).ConclusionThese results supported the benefit of VRD over VTD for induction in transplant-eligible patients with NDMM. The trials included are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01916252, NCT01191060, NCT00461747, and NCT01971658).-
dc.format.extent12 p.-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherFrontiers Media SA-
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1197340-
dc.relation.ispartofFrontiers in Oncology, 2023, vol. 13-
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1197340-
dc.rightscc by (c) Rosiñol, Laura et al., 2023-
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es/*
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))-
dc.subject.classificationMieloma múltiple-
dc.subject.classificationTerapèutica-
dc.subject.otherMultiple myeloma-
dc.subject.otherTherapeutics-
dc.titleIntegrated analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating bortezomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone or bortezomib + thalidomide + dexamethasone induction in transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma-
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article-
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion-
dc.date.updated2023-12-13T12:45:55Z-
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess-
dc.identifier.pmid38023148-
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
fonc-13-1197340.pdf1.64 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons