ArticleInternational journal of hematology2020
Pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in treatment-naive multiple myeloma (KEYNOTE-185): subgroup analysis in Japanese patients.
Article in International journal of hematology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global, randomized, open-label KEYNOTE-185 study closed early after an interim analysis showed an unfavorable benefit-risk profile with pembrolizumab plus lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) versus Rd alone in treatment-naive, transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma. This subgroup analysis reported outcomes in the Japanese population. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab plus Rd or Rd alone, stratified by age and International Staging System. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Fifty-two Japanese patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus Rd (n = 27) or Rd (n = 25). The median follow-up was 7.2 months (range, 0.4-13.8). The median PFS was not reached (NR); 6-month PFS was 91.2% versus 86.2% with pembrolizumab plus Rd versus Rd [hazard ratio (HR), 0.31; 95% CI, 0.06-1.63]. The median overall survival (OS) was NR; 6-month OS was 96.2% versus 95.7% with pembrolizumab plus Rd versus Rd (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.03-3.72). With pembrolizumab plus Rd versus Rd, grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 70.4% versus 69.6% of patients; serious adverse events occurred in 40.7% versus 52.5%. Although in the Japanese subgroup of KEYNOTE-185 adding pembrolizumab to Rd did not show an unfavorable risk-benefit, the analysis is limited by short follow-up and small sample size, affecting generalizability of the results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32949374What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.