Trial reportBlood2026
Isatuximab, bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for multiple myeloma: dynamics of MRD negativity in the IMROZ study.
Trial report in Blood, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03319667 (A Phase 3 Randomized, Open-label, Multicenter Study Assessing the Clinical Benefit of Isatuximab), which is not on this 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.
A Phase 3 Randomized, Open-label, Multicenter Study Assessing the Clinical Benefit of Isatuximab (SAR650984) in Combination With Bortezomib (Velcade®), Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Not Eligible for Transplant
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Isatuximab: A Review in Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.Targeted oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractQuadruplet therapy with Isa-VRd (isatuximab, Velcade [bortezomib], Revlimid [lenalidomide], and dexamethasone) followed by Isa-Rd in the randomized phase 3 IMROZ study provided a significant progression-free survival benefit to transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). In the primary analysis, more Isa-VRd/Isa-Rd-treated patients achieved minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity and MRD-negative complete response (CR) at any time point than patients receiving VRd followed by Rd. Here, we report landmark analysis results of MRD negativity over time and its impact on clinical outcomes in IMROZ. Treatment with Isa-VRd/Isa-Rd led to deeper responses, with higher rates of MRD negativity and MRD-negative CR at the end of induction and during maintenance vs VRd/Rd, up to 60 months of follow-up. Benefit with Isa-VRd/Isa-Rd was observed across key patient subgroups, including older (>70 years) and frail patients. Time to progression (TTP) was significantly prolonged with Isa-VRd/Isa-Rd vs VRd/Rd in patients who converted from MRD negative to MRD positive at any time point. In a landmark analysis of the time of conversion to MRD positivity, TTP in patients who converted from MRD negative at the end of induction to MRD positive also favored Isa-VRd/Isa-Rd. Evaluating MRD status of patients at >1 time point may therefore be useful to support decisions on treatment selection and treatment continuation/discontinuation. Our findings on the degree of MRD negativity and MRD-negative CR benefit achieved during induction and maintenance by patients receiving Isa-VRd/Isa-Rd vs VRd/Rd extend the IMROZ primary analyses and further support Isa-VRd as standard of care for frontline treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03319667.
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.