ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Efficacy and safety of once weekly selinexor 40 mg versus 60 mg with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
A Phase 1b/2 Study of Selinexor (KPT-330) in Combination With Backbone Treatments for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma and Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma
A Phase 2b, Open-label, Multi-arm Clinical Trial of Selinexor Plus Low-dose Dexamethasone (Sd) in Patients With Penta-refractory Multiple Myeloma or Selinexor and Bortezomib Plus Low-dose Dexamethasone (SVd) in Patients With Triple-class Refractory Multiple Myeloma
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Benefit of selinexor dose reduction on outcomes with selinexor, bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma: Subgroup analysis of the BOSTON trial.British journal of haematology · 2026Trial
- Refining the role of selinexor in multiple myeloma: strategic use in a shifting treatment landscape.ESMO open · 2026Review
- Review
- Focusing on Selinexor for Holding and Bridging Prior to CAR-T in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Real-World Treatment Patterns and Survival Outcomes of Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Treated with a Selinexor-Containing Triplet-Based Regimen.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Lowering the Selinexor Dose within the Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone Combination Regimen Elicits Fewer Side Effects While Comparable Efficacy Against Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.OncoTargets and therapy · 2025Article
- Lower dose and weekly schedules of selinexor in multiple myeloma - updated evidence on safety and efficacy.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Unraveling the complexity of drug resistance mechanisms to SINE, T cell-engaging therapies and CELMoDs in multiple myeloma: a comprehensive review.Cancer drug resistance (Alhambra, Calif.) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify the optimal dose of selinexor in combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (SPd). Methods: An analysis of efficacy and safety of 2 once-weekly selinexor regimens (60 mg and 40 mg) with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (SPd-60 and SPd-40, respectively) given to patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the STOMP (NCT02343042) and XPORT-MM-028 (NCT04414475) trials. Results: Twenty-eight patients (60.7% males, median age 67.5 years) and 20 patients (35.0% males, median age 65.5 years) were analyzed in the SPd-40 and SPd-60 cohorts, respectively. Overall response rate was 50% (95% confidence interval [CI] 30.6-69.4%) and 65% (95% CI 40.8-84.6%), respectively. Very good partial response or better was reported in 28.6% (95% CI 13.2-48.7%) and 30.0% (95% CI 11.9-54.3%) of patients, respectively. Among 27 responders in both cohorts, the 12-month sustained response rate was 83.3% (95% CI 64.7-100.0%) for SPd-40 and 28.1% (95% CI 8.9-88.8%) for SPd-60. Median progression-free survival was 18.4 months (95% CI 6.5 months, not evaluable [NE]) and 9.5 months (95% CI 7.6 months-NE) for SPd-40 and SPd-60, respectively. Twenty-four-month survival rates were 64.2% (95% CI 47.7-86.3%) for SPd-40 and 51.1% (95% CI 29.9-87.5%) for SPd-60. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) included neutropenia (all grades: SPd-40 64.3% versus SPd-60 75.0%), anemia (46.4% versus 65.0%), thrombocytopenia (42.9% versus 45.0%), fatigue (46.4% versus 75.0%), nausea (32.1% versus 70.0%) and diarrhea (28.6% versus 35.0%). Conclusion: The all-oral combination of SPd exhibited preliminary signs of efficacy and was generally tolerable in patients with RRMM. The overall risk-benefit profile favored the SPd-40 regimen.
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.