Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39272795›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Comparative Meta-Analysis of Triplet vs. Quadruplet Induction Regimens in Newly Diagnosed, Treatment Naïve, Multiple Myeloma.

Barry Paul, Faiz Anwer, Shahzad Raza, Aytaj Mammadzadeh, Bayan Khasawneh, Sara Shatnawi, Joseph McGuirk, Nausheen Ahmed, Zahra Mahmoudjafari, Muhammad Mushtaq and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Barry PaulUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2702-8225
Faiz AnwerUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Shahzad RazaUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2739-2265
Aytaj MammadzadehUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Bayan KhasawnehUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7531-1178
Sara ShatnawiUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Joseph McGuirkDivision of Hematologic Malignancies & Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Nausheen AhmedUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4336-4982
Zahra MahmoudjafariUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Muhammad MushtaqUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Al-Ola AbdallahUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.
Shebli AtrashUS Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative (USMIRC), Westwood, KS 66205, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4547-7534

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of 4-drug induction regimens for treatment naïve newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) is associated with improved depth of response and progression-free survival (PFS). However, head-to-head trials of 4-drug combinations are lacking, and instead, these regimens are typically compared to 3-drug backbones; limiting the ability to discern whether any additional benefit (or toxicity) is simply additive or represents a synergy (or interaction). We conducted a meta-analysis of phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials that randomized treatment naïve NDMM patients to either a 4-drug or 3-drug induction regimen. We included 11 trials which represented 6509 unique patients. PFS for all trials in the meta-analysis was 54 months with a 4-drug induction and 8.9 months with a 3-drug induction (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.45; 0.54), but there was no benefit to using a 4-drug induction that did not include an anti-CD38 antibody (PFS 4-drug 8.1 months, PFS 3-drug 8.0 months; HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.86; 1.06). Adverse events were more frequent with the quadruplet regimens but were predominately mild. High-grade (≥3) adverse events (AEs) that were more common with 4-drug regimens were infections (RR: 1.34; 95% CI 1.17; 1.54) and thrombocytopenia (RR: 1.39; 95% CI 1.12; 1.74). This study suggests that 4-drug induction regimens which include an anti-CD38 antibody improve efficacy although with additional toxicity in NDMM patients.

Indexed as

anti-CD38 antibodydaratumumabisatuximabmultiple myeloma

Identifiers

PMID39272795
PMCPMC11394295

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.