ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2025
Lowering the Selinexor Dose within the Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone Combination Regimen Elicits Fewer Side Effects While Comparable Efficacy Against Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As a novel oral Exportin 1 (XPO1) inhibitor, selinexor at 80 or 100 mg has demonstrated efficacy in treating relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), nonetheless, this dosage has shown poor tolerability. Objective: To explore the optimal dosage of selinexor, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of 60 vs 40 mg selinexor, combine with regimen comprising pomalidomide and dexamethasone in RRMM. Design: 21 patients with RRMM were enrolled to receive selinexor (60 or 40 mg once weekly), together with pomalidomide (4 mg/day on days 1-21) and dexamethasone (40 mg once weekly); the SPD-60 group (6 patients) vs SPD-40 group (15 patients). Methods: The clinical response and efficacy of the two groups were continuously followed up, and statistical analysis was carried out to screen out the dose group with fewer side effects and better efficacy. The primary endpoint was (objective response rates) ORR. The secondary endpoints included treatment safety and tolerability, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: The ORR of the SPD-60 and SPD-40 groups were 33.3% and 46.7% respectively ( Conclusion: The SPD-40 regimen may be more clinically applicable than SPD-60, as it elicited fewer adverse effects while demonstrating equivalent efficacy. Trial Registration:
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.