All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the International Myeloma Foundation or HealthTree for Multiple Myeloma.
The mm Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the mm Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The mm and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The Multiple Myeloma Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Roche and Sanofi. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out more
Create an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View mm content recommended for you
Efficacy and safety of Isa-VRD in the treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM: Phase III BENEFIT trial
|
Data from the phase III BENEFIT trial (NCT04751877) evaluating the impact of the addition of weekly bortezomib to isatuximab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (Isa-VRd) for the treatment of transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) were published by Leleu et al.1 in Nature Medicine. The efficacy and safety of Isa-Rd with and without the addition of bortezomib was evaluated. The primary endpoint was measurable residual disease (MRD) benefit at 18 months post randomization. |
| Key learnings: |
|
At 18 months, the MRD negativity rate at ×10-5 was higher in the Isa-VRd arm compared with Isa-Rd arm (53% vs 26%; odds ratio, 3.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.89–5.28; p < 0.0001). |
|
Very good partial response and complete response or better was higher with Isa-VRd compared with Isa-Rd (58% vs 31%; odds ratio, 2.97; 95% confidence interval, 2–5; p < 0.0001). |
|
Neutropenia was the most common adverse event reported in both cohorts.
|
|
Thrombocytopenia was more frequent in patients treated with Isa-VRd compared with those treated with Isa-Rd (27% vs 14%). |
|
Neuropathy was more common in patients treated with Isa-VRd compared with those treated with Isa-Rd (52% vs 28%).
|
|
Isa-VRd demonstrated higher rates of MRD negativity and deeper levels of response, highlighting the potential of Isa-VRd as a new standard of care treatment for transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. |
References
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:
The content was clear and easy to understand
The content addressed the learning objectives
The content was relevant to my practice
I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content
