Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages (January 2019)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Combination of ofatumumab and reduced-dose CHOP for diffuse large B-cell lymphomas in patients aged 80 years or older: an open-label, multicentre, single-arm,
Advertisements

Volume 385, Issue 9980, Pages (May 2015)
Volume 16, Issue 2, Pages (February 2015)
Volume 376, Issue 9747, Pages (October 2010)
Volume 18, Issue 7, Pages (July 2017)
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages (April 2012)
Volume 388, Issue 10058, Pages (November 2016)
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (May 2014)
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages (February 2016)
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages (February 2018)
Helen Cox, Mark P Nicol  The Lancet Infectious Diseases 
Multiple Myeloma: Diagnosis and Treatment
Volume 373, Issue 9666, Pages (March 2009)
Volume 389, Issue 10076, Pages (April 2017)
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages (July 2014)
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages (February 2014)
Myeloma 11. A Summary of results to date.
Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine 13 delivered as one primary and one booster dose (1 + 1) compared with two primary doses and a booster (2 + 1) in UK infants:
Volume 376, Issue 9757, Pages (December 2010)
Volume 374, Issue 9707, Pages (December 2009)
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages (April 2014)
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages (April 2014)
Volume 17, Issue 9, Pages (September 2016)
Volume 18, Issue 7, Pages (July 2017)
Volume 12, Issue 7, Pages (July 2011)
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (May 2014)
Volume 12, Issue 8, Pages (August 2011)
Volume 4, Issue 6, Pages (June 2017)
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages (March 2017)
Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages (January 2014)
Volume 5, Issue 11, Pages (November 2018)
Volume 387, Issue 10023, Pages (March 2016)
Volume 389, Issue 10073, Pages (March 2017)
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages (May 2013)
Volume 14, Issue 11, Pages (October 2013)
Volume 373, Issue 9666, Pages (March 2009)
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages (March 2017)
Volume 385, Issue 9962, Pages (January 2015)
Sorafenib in combination with transarterial chemoembolisation in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (TACE 2): a randomised placebo-controlled,
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages (April 2018)
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages (July 2014)
Volume 373, Issue 9676, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 388, Issue 10058, Pages (November 2016)
Volume 18, Issue 8, Pages (August 2017)
Volume 376, Issue 9757, Pages (December 2010)
Volume 388, Issue 10055, Pages (October 2016)
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (May 2014)
Volume 381, Issue 9880, Pages (May 2013)
Volume 392, Issue 10162, Pages (December 2018)
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages (May 2013)
A clinical prediction model for outcome and therapy delivery in transplant-ineligible patients with myeloma (UK Myeloma Research Alliance Risk Profile):
Volume 5, Issue 4, Pages (April 2018)
Volume 375, Issue 9726, Pages (May 2010)
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages (February 2018)
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (May 2014)
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages (July 2014)
Response comparison of multiple myeloma and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance to the same anti-myeloma therapy: a retrospective cohort.
Volume 376, Issue 9757, Pages (December 2010)
Volume 18, Issue 10, Pages (October 2017)
Volume 12, Issue 8, Pages (August 2011)
Volume 376, Issue 9747, Pages (October 2010)
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages (January 2018)
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages (January 2011)
Effectiveness of strategies to improve health-care provider practices in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review  Alexander K Rowe,
Outcomes of patients with childhood B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia with late bone marrow relapses: long-term follow-up of the ALLR3 open-label.
Volume 20, Issue 5, Pages (May 2019)
Volume 392, Issue 10162, Pages (December 2018)
Volume 20, Issue 7, Pages (July 2019)
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages (February 2016)
Volume 6, Issue 7, Pages (July 2019)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 57-73 (January 2019) Lenalidomide maintenance versus observation for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (Myeloma XI): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial  Prof Graham H Jackson, MD, Prof Faith E Davies, MD, Charlotte Pawlyn, PhD, David A Cairns, PhD, Alina Striha, MSc, Corinne Collett, BSc, Anna Hockaday, BSc, John R Jones, PhD, Bhuvan Kishore, MBBS, Mamta Garg, MD, Cathy D Williams, FRCPath, Kamaraj Karunanithi, FRCPath, Jindriska Lindsay, MUDr, Matthew W Jenner, MBBS, Prof Gordon Cook, PhD, Prof Nigel H Russell, MD, Martin F Kaiser, MD, Prof Mark T Drayson, PhD, Roger G Owen, MD, Prof Walter M Gregory, PhD, Prof Gareth J Morgan, PhD  The Lancet Oncology  Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 57-73 (January 2019) DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9 Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Trial profile *Randomisation occurred between May 26, 2010, and April 20, 2016. †Randomisation occurred between Jan 13, 2011, and Aug 11, 2017. ‡Censored for progression-free survival analysis. The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Kaplan-Meier plots of progression-free survival (A) and overall survival (B) in the intention-to-treat population The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival 2 in the intention-to-treat population The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Subgroup analysis of progression-free survival (A) Forest plot of progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. For the response before maintenance (NC or PD) subgroup, the Cox model was inestimable because of the small numbers of patients and events in the subgroup. Comparisons by sex, International Staging System disease stage, and response before maintenance were done as post-hoc analyses. The test for heterogeneity in the Response before maintenance setting only applied to the CR or VGPR and PR or MR subgroups. (B) Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival in transplantation-eligible patients. (C) Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival in transplantation-ineligible patients. CR=complete response. CRD=cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. CTD=cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone. CVD=cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. HR=hazard ratio. KCRD=carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. MR=minimal response. NC=no change. PD=progressive disease. PR=partial response. VGPR=very good partial response. *Likelihood ratio test for heterogeneity of effect among patients with subgroup data available. The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Subgroup analysis of progression-free survival (A) Forest plot of progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. For the response before maintenance (NC or PD) subgroup, the Cox model was inestimable because of the small numbers of patients and events in the subgroup. Comparisons by sex, International Staging System disease stage, and response before maintenance were done as post-hoc analyses. The test for heterogeneity in the Response before maintenance setting only applied to the CR or VGPR and PR or MR subgroups. (B) Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival in transplantation-eligible patients. (C) Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival in transplantation-ineligible patients. CR=complete response. CRD=cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. CTD=cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone. CVD=cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone. HR=hazard ratio. KCRD=carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. MR=minimal response. NC=no change. PD=progressive disease. PR=partial response. VGPR=very good partial response. *Likelihood ratio test for heterogeneity of effect among patients with subgroup data available. The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Subgroup analysis of overall survival (A) Forest plot of overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. (B) Kaplan-Meier plot of overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients. (C) Kaplan-Meier plot of overall survival in transplantation-ineligible patients. CR=complete response. CRD=cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. CTD=cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone. CVD=cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone. HR=hazard ratio. KCRD=carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. MR=minimal response. NC=no change. PD=progressive disease. PR=partial response. VGPR=very good partial response. *Likelihood ratio test for heterogeneity of effect amongst patients with subgroup data available. The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Subgroup analysis of overall survival (A) Forest plot of overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. (B) Kaplan-Meier plot of overall survival in transplantation-eligible patients. (C) Kaplan-Meier plot of overall survival in transplantation-ineligible patients. CR=complete response. CRD=cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. CTD=cyclophosphamide, thalidomide, and dexamethasone. CVD=cyclophosphamide, bortezomib and dexamethasone. HR=hazard ratio. KCRD=carfilzomib, cyclophosphamide, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. MR=minimal response. NC=no change. PD=progressive disease. PR=partial response. VGPR=very good partial response. *Likelihood ratio test for heterogeneity of effect amongst patients with subgroup data available. The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 Kaplan-Meier plot of progression-free survival 2 in transplantation-eligible patients (A) and transplantation-ineligible patients (B) The Lancet Oncology 2019 20, 57-73DOI: (10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30687-9) Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license Terms and Conditions