ArticlePloS one
Cyclophosphamide addition to pomalidomide/dexamethasone is not necessarily associated with universal benefits in RRMM.
Article in PloS one. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- iADRGSE: A Graph-Embedding and Self-Attention Encoding for Identifying Adverse Drug Reaction in the Earlier Phase of Drug Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the backdrop of rapidly changing relapsed/refractory (RR) multiple myeloma (MM) treatment schema that mainly evolves around immunotherapies, it is easy to disregard more traditional drugs. Finding the best partner for pomalidomide, a potent third-generation immunomodulatory drug, is an important agenda we face as a community and cyclophosphamide addition has been used for outcomes augmentation. We carried out this real-world study to identify patients who will show durable response to pomalidomide and those who will benefit from cyclophosphamide addition. A total of 103 patients (57 in pomalidomide-dexamethasone [Pd] group versus 46 in pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone [PCd]) were studied. They were previously treated with bortezomib (98.1%) or lenalidomide (100%) and previous lines of therapy were median 3 lines. Significantly better overall response rate (ORR) was seen in the PCd (75.6%) than Pd (41.7%) group (p = 0.001), but no differences in survival outcomes. Subgroup analysis revealed that high-risk myeloma features, poor response to lenalidomide or bortezomib had superior ORRs when cyclophosphamide was added. Also, long-term responders for pomalidomide were associated with excellent response to previous IMiD treatments. Pomalidomide-based therapy was discontinued in five patients due to intolerance or adverse events, but there was no mortality during treatment. In conclusion, we showed that pomalidomide-based treatment is still relevant and can ensure durable response in RRMM setting, especially for patients who responded well to previous lenalidomide. Addition of cyclophosphamide to Pd is associated with better ORR, and can be positively considered in fit patients with high-risk MM, extramedullary disease, and less-than-satisfactory response to previous lenalidomide treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.