Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32892275›Full record

Observational studyAnnals of hematology2020

Ixazomib-based frontline therapy in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in real-life practice showed comparable efficacy and safety profile with those reported in clinical trial: a multi-center study.

Jing Li, Li Bao, Zhongjun Xia, Sili Wang, Xin Zhou, Kaiyang Ding, Wenhao Zhang, Wei Yang, Bingzong Li, Chengcheng Fu and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Annals of hematology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Jing LiDepartment of Hematology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Li BaoDepartment of Hematology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhongjun XiaDepartment of Hematologic Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Sili WangThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Xin ZhouWuxi People Hospital, WuXi, China.
Kaiyang DingAnhui Provincial Cancer Hospital, Hefei, China.
Wenhao ZhangXinhua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Wei YangShengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shengjing, China.
Bingzong LiThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Chengcheng FuDepartment of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Jiangsu Institute of Hematology, Suzhou, China.
Bing ChenDepartment of Hematology, The Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, China.
Luoming HuaThe Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Liang WangDepartment of Hematology, ZhuJiang Hospital of Southern Medical Univeristy, Guangzhou, China.
Jun LuoThe First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi, China.
Yang YangDepartment of Hematology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Tianhong XuDepartment of Hematology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Weida WangDepartment of Hematologic Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China.
Yun HuangThe First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Guolin WuAnhui Provincial Cancer Hospital, Hefei, China.
Peng LiuDepartment of Hematology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. liu.peng@zs-hospital.sh.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9639-6606
Fudan University · CNAnhui Provincial Hospital · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University · CNSoochow University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNAffiliated Hospital of Hebei University · CNGuangxi Medical University · CNNanjing Drum Tower Hospital · CNPeking University · CNSheng Jing Hospital · CNWuxi People's Hospital · CNXinHua Hospital · CNZhujiang Hospital · CN

Funding

National Key New Drug Creation Special Programs 2017ZX09304-021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The induction therapy containing ixazomib, an oral proteasome inhibitor, has shown favorable efficacy and safety in clinical trials, but its experience in real-life remains limited. In routine practice, few patients received ixazomib-based induction therapy due to reasons including (1) patients' preference on oral regimens, (2) concerns on adverse events (AEs) of other intravenous/subcutaneous regimens, (3) requirements for less center visits, and (4) fears of COVID-19 and other infectious disease exposures. With the aim of assessing the real-life effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-based induction therapy, we performed this multi-center, observational study on 85 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients from 14 medical centers. Ixazomib-based regimens included ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in 44.7% of patients, ixazomib-dexamethasone (Id) in 29.4%, and Id plus another agent (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, or daratumumab) in 25.9%. Different ixazomib-based therapies were applied due to (1) financial burdens or limitations on local health insurance coverage, (2) concerns on treatment tolerance, and (3) drug accessibility issue. Ten patients received ixazomib maintenance. The median age was 67 years; 43.5% had ISS stage III disease; 48.2% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score ≥ 2; and 17.6% with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. Overall response rate for all 85 patients was 95.3%, including 65.9% very good partial response or better and 29.5% complete responses. The median time to response was 30 days. The response rate was similar across different ixazomib-based regimens. Median progression-free survival was not reached. Severe AEs (≥ grade 3) were reported in 29.4% of patients. No grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy (PN) occurred. Patients received a median of 6 (range 1-20) cycles of ixazomib treatment; 56.6% remained on treatment at data cutoff; 15.3% discontinued treatment due to intolerable AEs. These results support that the ixazomib-based frontline therapy was highly effective with acceptable toxicity in routine practice and the ixazomib oral regimens could be good alternative options for NDMM patients.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBoron CompoundsGlycineMultiple MyelomaPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesAdolescentAdultAgedAntibodies, MonoclonalCyclophosphamideDexamethasoneDoxorubicinDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHumansLenalidomideAntibodies, MonoclonalBoron CompoundsCyclophosphamidedaratumumabDexamethasoneDoxorubicinGlycineixazomibLenalidomideThalidomideFrontlineIxazomibMyelomaReal-world

Identifiers

PMID32892275
PMCPMC7474576
OpenAlexW3083659245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.