Dataset Information

Evaluating results from the multiple myeloma patient subset treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid in a randomized phase 3 trial.

ABSTRACT: In a phase 3 trial of denosumab vs zoledronic acid in patients (n=1776) with bone metastases and solid tumors or multiple myeloma, denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid for the primary end point of prevention of skeletal-related events. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups; however, an ad hoc overall survival analysis in the multiple myeloma subset of patients (n=180) favored zoledronic acid (hazard ratio (HR) 2.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-4.50; P=0.014). In the present analysis, we found imbalances between the groups with respect to baseline risk characteristics. HRs with two-sided 95% CIs were estimated using the Cox model. After adjustment in a covariate analysis, the CI crossed unity (HR 1.86; 95% CI 0.90-3.84; P=0.0954). Furthermore, we found a higher rate of early withdrawals for the reasons of lost to follow-up and withdrawal of consent in the zoledronic acid group; after accounting for these, the HR was 1.31 (95% CI 0.80-2.15; P=0.278). In conclusion, the survival results in multiple myeloma patients in this trial were confounded and will eventually be resolved by an ongoing phase 3 trial.

SUBMITTER: Raje N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4742634 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating results from the multiple myeloma patient subset treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid in a randomized phase 3 trial.

Raje N N Vadhan-Raj S S Willenbacher W W Terpos E E Hungria V V Spencer A A Alexeeva Y Y Facon T T Stewart A K AK Feng A A Braun A A Balakumaran A A Roodman G D GD

Blood cancer journal 20160108

In a phase 3 trial of denosumab vs zoledronic acid in patients (n=1776) with bone metastases and solid tumors or multiple myeloma, denosumab was superior to zoledronic acid for the primary end point of prevention of skeletal-related events. There was no difference in overall survival between the two groups; however, an ad hoc overall survival analysis in the multiple myeloma subset of patients (n=180) favored zoledronic acid (hazard ratio (HR) 2.26; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-4.50; P=0.01 ...[more]

PMID: 26745852

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe primary analysis of a global phase 3 study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of denosumab versus zoledronic acid for preventing skeletal-related events (SREs) in adults with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) indicated that denosumab was noninferior to zoledronic acid for time to first on-study SREs. Here we present a subgroup analysis to evaluate efficacy and safety in Asian patients.MethodsPatients were randomized 1:1 to receive denosumab 120 mg subcutaneously or zoledronic acid intravenously 4 mg every 4 weeks in a double-blind, double-dummy fashion. All patients received standard-of-care first-line antimyeloma treatment. Each patient received either study drug until an estimated 676 patients experienced at least one on-study SRE and the primary efficacy and safety analyses were completed.ResultsOf 1718 total enrolled patients, 196 Asian patients (denosumab, n = 103; zoledronic acid, n = 93) were included in this subgroup analysis. Fewer patients in the denosumab group developed first on-study SRE compared with the zoledronic acid group; the crude incidence of SREs at the primary analysis cutoff was 38.8% and 50.5%, respectively (HR [95% CI], 0.77 [0.48-1.26]). All 194 patients receiving at least one dose of study drug experienced at least one treatment-emergent AE. The most common AEs reported in either group (denosumab, zoledronic acid) were diarrhea (51.0%, 51.1%), nausea (42.2%, 46.7%), and pyrexia (38.2%, 41.3%). Treatment-emergent renal toxicity occurred in 9/102 (8.8%) and 20/92 (21.7%) patients, respectively. Similar rates of positively adjudicated osteonecrosis of the jaw (7 [6.9%] vs 5 [5.4%]) and treatment-emergent hypocalcemia (19 [18.6%] vs 17 [18.5%]) were reported in the denosumab and zoledronic acid groups, respectively.ConclusionEfficacy and safety outcomes from this Asian subgroup were comparable to those of the full study population. Overall, this analysis supports denosumab as an additional treatment option for standard of care for Asian patients with newly diagnosed MM with lytic bone lesions.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01345019.

Dataset Information

Evaluating results from the multiple myeloma patient subset treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid in a randomized phase 3 trial.

Publications

Evaluating results from the multiple myeloma patient subset treated with denosumab or zoledronic acid in a randomized phase 3 trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets