Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGarg, Mamta
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-20T12:55:21Z
dc.date.available2024-06-20T12:55:21Z
dc.date.issued2024-06-01
dc.identifier.citationHungria, V., Robak, P., Hus, M., Zherebtsova, V., Ward, C., Ho, P. J., Ribas de Almeida, A. C., Hajek, R., Kim, K., Grosicki, S., Sia, H., Bryant, A., Pitombeira de Lacerda, M., Aparecida Martinez, G., Sureda Balarí, A. M., Sandhu, I., Cerchione, C., Ganly, P., Dimopoulos, M., Fu, C., … DREAMM-7 Investigators (2024). Belantamab Mafodotin, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma. The New England journal of medicine, 10.1056/NEJMoa2405090. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2405090en_US
dc.identifier.other10.1056/NEJMoa2405090
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12904/18729
dc.description.abstractBackground: Belantamab mafodotin had single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, a finding that supports further evaluation of the agent in combination with standard-care therapies. Methods: In this phase 3, open-label, randomized trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (BVd), as compared with daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd), in patients who had progression of multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response duration, and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status. Results: In total, 494 patients were randomly assigned to receive BVd (243 patients) or DVd (251 patients). At a median follow-up of 28.2 months (range, 0.1 to 40.0), median progression-free survival was 36.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.4 to not reached) in the BVd group and 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.1 to 17.5) in the DVd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.53; P<0.001). Overall survival at 18 months was 84% in the BVd group and 73% in the DVd group. An analysis of the restricted mean response duration favored BVd over DVd (P<0.001). A complete response or better plus MRD-negative status occurred in 25% of the patients in the BVd group and 10% of those in the DVd group. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 95% of the patients in the BVd group and 78% of those in the DVd group. Ocular events were more common in the BVd group than in the DVd group (79% vs. 29%); such events were managed with dose modifications, and events of worsening visual acuity mostly resolved. Conclusions: As compared with DVd therapy, BVd therapy conferred a significant benefit with respect to progression-free survival among patients who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. Most patients had grade 3 or higher adverse events. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-7 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04246047; EudraCT number, 2018-003993-29.). Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.
dc.description.urihttps://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2405090?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subjectBelantamab Mafodotinen_US
dc.subjectBortezomiben_US
dc.subjectDexamethasoneen_US
dc.subjectMultiple Myelomaen_US
dc.titleBelantamab Mafodotin, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myelomaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps:/doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2405090en_US
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_US
refterms.panelUnspecifieden_US
html.description.abstractBackground: Belantamab mafodotin had single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, a finding that supports further evaluation of the agent in combination with standard-care therapies. Methods: In this phase 3, open-label, randomized trial, we evaluated belantamab mafodotin, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (BVd), as compared with daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd), in patients who had progression of multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Key secondary end points were overall survival, response duration, and minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative status. Results: In total, 494 patients were randomly assigned to receive BVd (243 patients) or DVd (251 patients). At a median follow-up of 28.2 months (range, 0.1 to 40.0), median progression-free survival was 36.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 28.4 to not reached) in the BVd group and 13.4 months (95% CI, 11.1 to 17.5) in the DVd group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.53; P<0.001). Overall survival at 18 months was 84% in the BVd group and 73% in the DVd group. An analysis of the restricted mean response duration favored BVd over DVd (P<0.001). A complete response or better plus MRD-negative status occurred in 25% of the patients in the BVd group and 10% of those in the DVd group. Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 95% of the patients in the BVd group and 78% of those in the DVd group. Ocular events were more common in the BVd group than in the DVd group (79% vs. 29%); such events were managed with dose modifications, and events of worsening visual acuity mostly resolved. Conclusions: As compared with DVd therapy, BVd therapy conferred a significant benefit with respect to progression-free survival among patients who had relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma after at least one line of therapy. Most patients had grade 3 or higher adverse events. (Funded by GSK; DREAMM-7 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04246047; EudraCT number, 2018-003993-29.). Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.en_US
rioxxterms.funder.project94a427429a5bcfef7dd04c33360d80cden_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record