Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34185964›Full record

SynthesisCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2021

PK/PD modeling analysis for dosing regimen selection of isatuximab as single agent and in combination therapy in patients with multiple myeloma.

Kimiko Koiwai, Raouf El-Cheikh, Hoai-Thu Thai, Claire Brillac, Jean-Baptiste Fau, Christine Veyrat-Follet, Marie-Laure Risse, Helgi van de Velde, Dorothée Semiond, Laurent Nguyen

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Optimizing tylosin dosage for co-infection ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

Kimiko KoiwaiSanofi Translational Medicine & Early Development, Paris, France.
Raouf El-CheikhSanofi Translational Medicine & Early Development, Paris, France.
Hoai-Thu ThaiSanofi Data and Data Sciences, Paris, France.
Claire BrillacSanofi Translational Medicine & Early Development, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-1743-3211
Jean-Baptiste FauSanofi Translational Medicine & Early Development, Paris, France.
Christine Veyrat-FolletSanofi Data and Data Sciences, Paris, France.
Marie-Laure RisseSanofi Oncology, Vitry-sur-Seine, France.
Helgi van de VeldeSanofi, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Dorothée SemiondSanofi Translational Medicine & Early Development, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Laurent NguyenSanofi Translational Medicine & Early Development, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This analysis describes the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) modeling framework that supported selection of the isatuximab (anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody) dosing regimen alongside its early clinical development in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The PK/PD mathematical model characterized the variations of patient serum M-protein concentrations, the primary marker of tumor burden in multiple myeloma (MM). Three separate PK/PD models were built sequentially as data became available from phase I clinical trials. The primary PK/PD analysis was initiated using monotherapy phase I study data (n = 122), followed by analysis of data collected from phase Ib combination studies with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd, n = 40) and then with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd, n = 31). Using the PK/PD model, abnormal "myeloma" protein (M-protein) profiles under different isatuximab dosing regimens were simulated. Overall, simulations revealed that regimens which included a loading period of four weekly administrations followed by administration every 2 weeks thereafter (QW4-Q2W), reduced M-protein levels more than a Q2W regimen without a loading period. For isatuximab monotherapy, a 20 mg/kg dose induced greater reduction in serum M-protein levels compared with doses equal or lower than 10 mg/kg. For isatuximab in combination with either Rd or Pd, simulations yielded no substantial benefit in terms of M-protein reduction between isatuximab 10 mg/kg and 20 mg/kg. These PK/PD analyses supported the use of isatuximab 10 mg/kg QW4-Q2W in combination with Pd in the phase III trial.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsClinical Trials, Phase I as TopicDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiple MyelomaMyeloma ProteinsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agentsisatuximabmultiple myeloma M-proteinsMyeloma Proteins

Identifiers

PMID34185964
PMCPMC8376141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.