Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial details imported from ClinicalTrials.gov
For full trial details, please see the original record at
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00689936
Registration number
NCT00689936
Ethics application status
Date submitted
2/06/2008
Date registered
4/06/2008
Date last updated
20/11/2019
Titles & IDs
Public title
Study to Determine Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Plus Low-dose Dexamethasone Versus Melphalan, Prednisone, Thalidomide in Patients With Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma
Query!
Scientific title
A Phase III, Randomized, Open-label, 3-arm Study to Determine the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide(REVLIMID) Plus Low-dose Dexamethasone When Given Until Progressive Disease or for 18 Four-week Cycles Versus the Combination of Melphalan, Prednisone, and Thalidomide Given for 12 Six-week Cycles in Patients With Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma Who Are Either 65 Years of Age or Older or Not Candidates for Stem Cell Transplantation.
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
0
0
2007-004823-39
Query!
Secondary ID [2]
0
0
CC-5013-MM-020
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
FIRST
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Multiple Myeloma
0
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Cancer
0
0
0
0
Query!
Other cancer types
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
Treatment: Drugs - Lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone
Treatment: Drugs - Lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone given for 18 four-week cycles
Treatment: Drugs - Melphalan, Prednisone and Thalidomide
Experimental: Lenalidomide / Dexamethasone until disease progression - Lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone given until disease progression
Experimental: Lenalidomide / Dexamethasone for 18 cycles - Lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone given for 18 four-week cycles
Active Comparator: Melphalan, Prednisone, and Thalidomide (MPT) for 12 cycles - Combination of Melphalan, Prednisone and Thalidomide given for 12 six-week cycles
Treatment: Drugs: Lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone
Lenalidomide - oral, 2.5mg, 5mg, 10mg, 15mg 20mg, or 25 mg capsules, given either days 1-21 of each 28 day cycles or given every other day for 21 days until documentation of PD.
Dexamethasone - oral 4mg tablets for a total dose of 20mg or 40 mg given days 1,8,15 and 22 of each 28 day cycle up to disease progression
Treatment: Drugs: Lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone given for 18 four-week cycles
lenalidomide - oral, 2.5mg, 5mg, 10mg, 15mg, 20 mg or 25 mg capsules given on days 1-21 of each 28 day cycle or every other day for 21 days for 18 cycles.
Dexamethasone - oral 4mg tablets for a total dose of 20mg or 40 mg given days 1,8,15 and 22 of each 28 day cycle for 18 cycles
Treatment: Drugs: Melphalan, Prednisone and Thalidomide
Melphalan - oral, 2mg tablets dosed at either 0.25mg/kg, 0.125 mg/kg, 0.20mg/kg or 0.10mg/kg on days 1-4 of each 42 day cycle up to 12 cycles Prednisone - oral, 5mg, 10mg, 20 mg and 50 mg tablets dosed at 2mg/kg daily days 1-4 of each 42 day cycle for up to 12 cycles Thalidomide - oral, 50mg, 100mg and 200 mg capsules dosed at either 100mg or 200 mg daily on days 1-41 of each 42 day cycle for up to 12 cycles
Query!
Intervention code [1]
0
0
Treatment: Drugs
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
Query!
Control group
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
0
0
Kaplan-Meier Estimates of Progression-free Survival (PFS) Based on the Response Assessment by the Independent Review Adjudication Committee (IRAC)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
PFS was calculated as the time from randomization to the first documented PD or death due to any cause during the study, which ever occurred first based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG). Those who withdrew for any reason or received another anti-myeloma therapy without documented PD were censored on the date of their last response assessment, prior to receiving any other anti-myeloma therapy. Censoring rules for PFS: - No baseline assessments and no progression or death documented within the 2 scheduled assessments; Death within the lst two assessments without any adequate response assessment; Progression documented between scheduled assessments; Death between adequate assessments; no progression; study discontinuations for reasons other than PD or death; new anti-myeloma started prior to PD; death or PD after an extended lost to follow-up time period (2 or more missed scheduled assessment's).
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
From date of randomization until the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013. Median follow-up time for all participants was 17.1 months.
Query!
Primary outcome [2]
0
0
Kaplan-Meier Estimates of PFS Based on the Response Assessment by the Investigator At the Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
PFS was calculated as the time from randomization to the first documented PD or death due to any cause during the study, which ever occurred first based on the International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Response criteria (IMWG). Those who withdrew for any reason or received another anti-myeloma therapy without documented PD were censored on the date of their last response assessment, prior to receiving any other anti-myeloma therapy. Censoring rules for PFS: - No baseline assessments and no progression or death documented within the 2 scheduled assessments; Death within the lst two assessments without any adequate response assessment; Progression documented between scheduled assessments; Death between adequate assessments; no progression; study discontinuations for reasons other than PD or death; new anti-myeloma started prior to PD; death or PD after an extended lost to follow-up time period (2 or more missed scheduled assessment's).
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
From date of randomization to date of data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow-up for all participants was 17.7 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Overall Survival at the Time of Final Analysis (OS)
Query!
Assessment method [1]
0
0
Overall survival was defined as the time between randomization and death. Participants, who died, regardless of the cause of death, were considered to have had an event. All participants who were lost to follow-up prior to the end of the trial or who were withdrawn from the trial were censored at the time of last contact. Participants who were still being treated were censored at the last available date the participant was known to be alive.
Query!
Timepoint [1]
0
0
From date of randomization to date of data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow-up for all participants was 48.3 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response Based on IRAC Review
Query!
Assessment method [2]
0
0
Objective response according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria was defined as a best overall response including a complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the IRAC Review. A CR is defined as: negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPR is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is: =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [2]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response Based on Investigator Assessment at Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [3]
0
0
Objective response according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria was defined as a best overall response including a complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the IRAC Review. A CR is defined s: negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPR is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is: =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [3]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Duration of Myeloma Response as Determined by the IRAC
Query!
Assessment method [4]
0
0
Duration of response was defined as the duration from the time when the response criteria were first met for CR or VGPR or PR based on IMWG criteria until the first date the response criteria were met for progressive disease or until the participant died from any cause, whichever occurred first.
Query!
Timepoint [4]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median follow-up for responders was 20.1 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Duration of Myeloma Response as Determined by an Investigator Assessment at Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [5]
0
0
Duration of response was defined as the duration from the time when the response criteria were first met for CR or VGPR or PR based on IMWG criteria until the first date the response criteria were met for progressive disease or until the participant died from any cause, whichever occurred first.
Query!
Timepoint [5]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment; data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow-up for responders was 19.9 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
0
0
Time to First Response Based on the Review by the IRAC
Query!
Assessment method [6]
0
0
The time to first myeloma response was defined as the time from randomization to the time when the response criteria for at least a PR was first met based on the IMWG criteria.
Query!
Timepoint [6]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
0
0
Time to First Response Based on the Investigator Assessment at the Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [7]
0
0
The time to first myeloma response was defined as the time from randomization to the time when the response criteria for at least a PR was first met based on the IMWG criteria assessed by the investigator.
Query!
Timepoint [7]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm.
Query!
Secondary outcome [8]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Treatment Failure (TTF)
Query!
Assessment method [8]
0
0
TTF is defined as the time between the randomization and discontinuation of study treatment for any reason, including disease progression (determined by IRAC based on the IMWG response criteria), treatment toxicity, start of another anti-myeloma therapy (AMT) or death.
Query!
Timepoint [8]
0
0
From date of randomization until the data cut-off of 24 May 2013; median follow-up for all participants was 16.1 months.
Query!
Secondary outcome [9]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) at the Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [9]
0
0
TTF is defined as the time between the randomization and discontinuation of study treatment for any reason, including disease progression (determined by the investigators assessment based on the IMWG response criteria), treatment toxicity, start of another anti-myeloma therapy (AMT) or death.
Query!
Timepoint [9]
0
0
From date of randomization until the data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median follow up for all participants was 16.1 months.
Query!
Secondary outcome [10]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates for Time to Second-line Anti-myeloma Treatment (AMT)
Query!
Assessment method [10]
0
0
Time to second-line anti-myeloma therapy was defined as time from randomization to the start of another non-protocol anti-myeloma therapy.
Query!
Timepoint [10]
0
0
From date of randomization until the data cut-off of 24 May 2013; median follow-up for all participants was 23.0 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [11]
0
0
Kaplan Meier Estimates of Time to Second Line Therapy AMT at the Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [11]
0
0
Time to second-line anti-myeloma therapy is defined as time from randomization to the start of another non-protocol anti-myeloma therapy. Those who do not receive another anti-myeloma therapy were censored at the last assessment or follow-up visit known to have received no new therapy.
Query!
Timepoint [11]
0
0
From date of randomization until the data cut-off of date 21 January 2016; median follow-up for all participants was 23.0 months
Query!
Secondary outcome [12]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With an Objective Response After Second-line Anti-myeloma Treatment at the Time of Final Analysis
Query!
Assessment method [12]
0
0
Objective response according to IMWG Uniform Response Criteria was defined as a best overall response including a complete response (CR), very good partial response (VGPR) or partial response (PR) based on the IRAC Review. A CR is defined s: negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPR is serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is: =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [12]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment; data cut-off date of 21 January 2016; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [13]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Adverse Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review.
Query!
Assessment method [13]
0
0
Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [13]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [14]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Favorable Hyperdiploidy Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review
Query!
Assessment method [14]
0
0
Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [14]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [15]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Normal Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review
Query!
Assessment method [15]
0
0
Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [15]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [16]
0
0
Percentage of Participants With a Myeloma Response by Uncertain Risk Cytogenetic Risk Category Based on IRAC Review
Query!
Assessment method [16]
0
0
Participants were placed in adverse and non-adverse cytogenetic risk categories at baseline and response rates evaluated. Adverse Risk: t(4;14), t(14;16), del(13q) or monosomy 13, del(17p), 1q gain Favorable Hyperdiploidy: : t(11;14), gains of 5/9/15; Normal: a normal result, gains other than 5/9/15, IgH deletion Uncertain risk: probes used for analysis cannot place participant in any of the other risk categories. Objective response = best overall response including CR, VGPR or PR based on the IRAC Review; A CR is negative serum and urine on immunofixation, disappearance of any soft tissue plasmacytomas and =5% plasma cells in BM; A VGPRis serum and urine M-protein detectable by immunofixation but not on electrophoresis or =90% reduction in serum M-protein and urine M-protein level <100 mg/24 hours; A PR is =50% reduction of serum M-Protein and reduction in urinary M-protein by =90% or to <200 mg/24 hours. If present at baseline a =50% reduction in size of soft tissue plasmacytomas.
Query!
Timepoint [16]
0
0
Disease response was assessed every 28 days until end of treatment or the data cut-off date of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [17]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) Global Health Status Domain
Query!
Assessment method [17]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/QOL scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better Global Health Status/QOL. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in QOL or functioning and positive values indicate improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [17]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [18]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Domain
Query!
Assessment method [18]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [18]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [19]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Role Functioning Domain
Query!
Assessment method [19]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Role Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [19]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [20]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning Domain
Query!
Assessment method [20]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Emotional Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [20]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [21]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning Domain
Query!
Assessment method [21]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Cognitive Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [21]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1, (Baseline) then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [22]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Social Functioning Domain
Query!
Assessment method [22]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Social Functioning Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating better functioning/support. Negative change from Baseline values indicate deterioration in functioning and positive values indicate improvement.
Query!
Timepoint [22]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [23]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Domain
Query!
Assessment method [23]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Fatigue Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [23]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation
Query!
Secondary outcome [24]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Pain Domain
Query!
Assessment method [24]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Pain Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [24]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [25]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Nausea/Vomiting Domain
Query!
Assessment method [25]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Nausea/Vomiting Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [25]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [26]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnea Domain
Query!
Assessment method [26]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Dyspnoea Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [26]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [27]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Insomnia Domain
Query!
Assessment method [27]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Insomnia Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of symptoms. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in symptoms and positive values indicate worsening symptoms.
Query!
Timepoint [27]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [28]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite Loss Domain
Query!
Assessment method [28]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Appetite Loss Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of appetite loss. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in appetite and positive values indicate worsening of appetite.
Query!
Timepoint [28]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [29]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Constipation Domain
Query!
Assessment method [29]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Constipation Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of constipation. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in constipation and positive values indicate worsening of constipation.
Query!
Timepoint [29]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [30]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Diarrhea Domain
Query!
Assessment method [30]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Diarrhea Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of diarrhea. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in diarrhea and positive values indicate worsening of diarrhea.
Query!
Timepoint [30]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [31]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the EORTC QLQ-C30 Financial Difficulties Domain
Query!
Assessment method [31]
0
0
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life (QOL) questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is a 30-question tool used in clinical research to assess the overall quality of life in cancer patients. It consists of 15 domains: 1 global health status (GHS) scale, 5 functional scales (Physical, Role, Cognitive, Emotional, Social), and 9 symptom scales/items (Fatigue, Nausea and Vomiting, Pain, Dyspnea, Sleep Disturbance, Appetite Loss, Constipation, Diarrhea, Financial Impact). The EORTC QLQ-C30 Financial Difficulties Scale is scored between 0 and 100, with a high score indicating a higher level of financial difficulties. Negative change from Baseline values indicate improvement in financial difficulties and positive values indicate worsening of financial difficulties.
Query!
Timepoint [31]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [32]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Disease Symptoms Scale
Query!
Assessment method [32]
0
0
EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; a higher score indicates more severe disease symptom(s).
Query!
Timepoint [32]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [33]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Side Effects Treatment Scale
Query!
Assessment method [33]
0
0
EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; a higher score represents a more severe overall side effect of treatment.
Query!
Timepoint [33]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [34]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Future Perspective Scale
Query!
Assessment method [34]
0
0
EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; for the future perspective scale, a higher score indicates a better perspective of the future.
Query!
Timepoint [34]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [35]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Patients With Multiple Myeloma (EORTC QLQ-MY20) Body Image Scale
Query!
Assessment method [35]
0
0
EORTC QLQ-MY20 is a validated questionnaire to assess the overall quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma. EORTC QLQ-MY20 includes four scales: disease symptoms, treatment side-effects, future perspective, and body image. Questions used a 4-point scale (from 1 'Not at All' to 4 'Very Much'). Scores were averaged, and transformed to a 0-100 scale; for the body image scale, a higher score indicates a better body image.
Query!
Timepoint [35]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [36]
0
0
Change From Baseline in the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) Health Utility Index Score
Query!
Assessment method [36]
0
0
EQ-5D is a self-administered questionnaire that assesses health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D descriptive health profile comprises five dimensions of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 3 levels of response: No problem (1), some problems (2), and extreme problems (3). A unique EQ-5D health state is defined by combining one level from each of the five dimensions into a single utility index score. EQ-5D index values range from -0.59 to 1.00 where higher EQ-5D scores represent better health status. A positive change from baseline score indicates improvement in health status and better health state.
Query!
Timepoint [36]
0
0
Cycle 1 Day 1 (Baseline), then Months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18 and Discontinuation visit
Query!
Secondary outcome [37]
0
0
Healthcare Resource Utilization (HRU): Rate of Inpatient Hospitalizations Per Year
Query!
Assessment method [37]
0
0
HRU was defined as any consumption of healthcare resources directly or indirectly related to the treatment of the patient. HRU Analysis may help in evaluating potential costs and budget impact of new treatments from a payer perspective. The rate of inpatient hospitalizations per patient year was calculated as the total number of hospitalizations divided by the total number of patient-years followed in the study period. Patient-years (PY) were calculated as the duration from baseline to last available HRQL assessment for each patient.
Query!
Timepoint [37]
0
0
Day 1 (randomization) up to last visit completed 25 July 2016
Query!
Secondary outcome [38]
0
0
Number of Participants With Adverse Events (AEs) During the Active Treatment Phase
Query!
Assessment method [38]
0
0
A TEAE is any AE occurring or worsening on or after the first treatment of any study drug, and within 30 days after the last dose of the last study drug. Severity grades according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE) on a 1-5 scale: Grade 1= Mild AE, Grade 2= Moderate AE, Grade 3= Severe AE, Grade 4= Life-threatening or disabling AE, Grade 5=Death related to AE. A serious AE is any AE occurring at any dose that: • Results in death; • Is life-threatening; • Requires or prolongs existing inpatient hospitalization; • Results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity; • Is a congenital anomaly/birth defect; • Constitutes an important medical event.
Query!
Timepoint [38]
0
0
From first dose of study drug through 28 days following the discontinuation visit from active treatment phase; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [39]
0
0
Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Creatinine Clearance (CrCl) During the Active Treatment Phase
Query!
Assessment method [39]
0
0
Renal function was assessed for participants from baseline to the most extreme value in creatinine clearance calculated using the Cockcroft-Gault estimation.
Query!
Timepoint [39]
0
0
Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [40]
0
0
Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Absolute Neutrophil Count During the Active Treatment Phase
Query!
Assessment method [40]
0
0
Neutrophil counts was assessed for participants from baseline grade to most extreme severity grade using the NCI CTCAE v 3.0 grading scale.
Query!
Timepoint [40]
0
0
Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [41]
0
0
Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Hemoglobin During the Active Treatment Phase
Query!
Assessment method [41]
0
0
Hemoglobin was assessed for participants from baseline grade to most extreme severity grade using the NCI CTCAE v 3.0 grading scale.
Query!
Timepoint [41]
0
0
Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [42]
0
0
Shift From Baseline to Most Extreme Postbaseline Value in Platelet Count During the Active Treatment Phase.
Query!
Assessment method [42]
0
0
Improvement in platelets was assessed for participants from baseline grade to most extreme severity grade using the NCI CTCAE v 3.0 grading scale.
Query!
Timepoint [42]
0
0
Randomization to end of treatment or the data cut off of 24 May 2013; median duration of treatment was 80.2 weeks in the Rd arm; 72 weeks in the Rd18 arm and 67.1 weeks in the MPT arm
Query!
Secondary outcome [43]
0
0
Improvement of Infection Rate by Observing the Historical Data Compared to the Clinical Data Base
Query!
Assessment method [43]
0
0
Improvement of infection rate by observing historical data compared to the data within clinical database as not analyzed.
Query!
Timepoint [43]
0
0
From randomization to 24 May 2013
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
1. Must understand and voluntarily sign informed consent form
2. Age = 18 years at the time of signing consent
3. Previously untreated, symptomatic multiple myeloma as defined by the 3 criteria below:
- MM diagnostic criteria (all 3 required):
- Monoclonal plasma cells in the bone marrow =10% and/or presence of a
biopsy-proven plasmacytoma
- Monoclonal protein present in the serum and/or urine
- Myeloma-related organ dysfunction (at least one of the following) [C] Calcium
elevation in the blood (serum calcium >10.5 mg/dl or upper limit of normal) [R]
Renal insufficiency (serum creatinine >2 mg/dl) [A] Anemia (hemoglobin <10 g/dl
or 2 g < laboratory normal) [B] Lytic bone lesions or osteoporosis
AND have measurable disease by protein electrophoresis analyses as defined by the
following:
- IgG multiple myeloma: Serum monoclonal paraprotein (M-protein) level = 1.0 g/dl
or urine M-protein level = 200 mg/24 hours
- IgA multiple myeloma: Serum M-protein level = 0.5 g/dl or urine M-protein level =
200 mg/24 hours
- IgM multiple myeloma (IgM M-protein plus lytic bone disease documented by
skeletal survey plain films): Serum M-protein level = 1.0 g/dl or urine M-protein
level = 200mg/24hours
- IgD multiple myeloma: Serum M-protein level = 0.05 g/dl or urine M-protein level
= 200 mg/24 hours
- Light chain multiple myeloma: Serum M-protein level = 1.0 g/dl or urine M-protein
level = 200 mg/24 hours
AND are at least 65 years of age or older or, if younger than 65 years of age, are not
candidates for stem cell transplantation because:
- The patient declines to undergo stem cell transplantation or
- Stem cell transplantation is not available to the patient due to cost or other
reasons
4. ECOG performance status of 0, 1, or 2
5. Able to adhere to the study visit schedule and other protocol requirements
6. Females of child-bearing potential (FCBP)^2:
1. Must agree to undergo two medically supervised pregnancy tests prior to starting
study therapy with either Rd or MPT. The first pregnancy test will be performed
within 10-14 days prior to the start of Rd or MPT and the second pregnancy test
will be performed within 24 hours prior to the start of Rd or MPT. She must also
agree to ongoing pregnancy testing during the course of the study and after the
end of study therapy. This applies even if the patient practices complete and
continued sexual abstinence.
2. Must commit to either continued abstinence from heterosexual intercourse (which
must be reviewed on a monthly basis) or agree to use and be able to comply with
effective contraception without interruption, 28 days prior to starting study
drug, during the study therapy (including during periods of dose interruptions),
and for 28 days after discontinuation of study therapy.
7. Male Patients:
1. Must agree to use a condom during sexual contact with a FCBP, even if they have
had a vasectomy, throughout study drug therapy, during any dose interruption and
after cessation of study therapy.
2. Must agree to not donate semen during study drug therapy and for a period after
end of study drug therapy.
3. Must practice complete abstinence or agree to use a condom during sexual contact
with a pregnant female or a female of childbearing potential while participating
in the study, during dose interruptions and for at least 28 days following study
drug discontinuation, even if he has undergone a successful vasectomy.
8. All patients must:
1. Have an understanding that the study drug could have a potential teratogenic
risk.
2. Agree to abstain from donating blood while taking study drug therapy and
following discontinuation of study drug therapy.
3. Agree not to share study medication with another person. All FCBP and male
patients must be counseled about pregnancy precautions and risks of fetal
exposure.
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
1. Previous treatment with anti-myeloma therapy (does not include radiotherapy,
bisphosphonates, or a single short course of steroid [i.e., less than or equal to the
equivalent of dexamethasone 40 mg/day for 4 days; such a short course of steroid
treatment must not have been given within 14 days of randomization]).
2. Any serious medical condition that places the patient at an unacceptable risk if he or
she participates in this study. Examples of such a medical condition are, but are not
limited to, patient with unstable cardiac disease as defined by: Cardiac events such
as MI within the past 6 months, NYHA heart failure class III-IV, uncontrolled atrial
fibrillation or hypertension; patients with conditions requiring chronic steroid or
immunosuppressive treatment, such as rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and
lupus, that likely need additional steroid or immunosuppressive treatments in addition
to the study treatment.
3. Pregnant or lactating females.
4. Any of the following laboratory abnormalities:
- Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) < 1,000/µL (1.0 x 109/L)
- Untransfused platelet count < 50,000 cells/µL (50 x 10^9/L)
- Serum SGOT/AST or SGPT/ALT > 3.0 x upper limit of normal (ULN)
5. Renal failure requiring hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis.
6. Prior history of malignancies, other than multiple myeloma, unless the patient has
been free of the disease for = 3 years. Exceptions include the following:
- Basal cell carcinoma of the skin
- Squamous cell carcinoma of the skin
- Carcinoma in situ of the cervix
- Carcinoma in situ of the breast
- Incidental histological finding of prostate cancer (TNM stage of T1a or T1b)
7. Patients who are unable or unwilling to undergo antithrombotic therapy.
8. Peripheral neuropathy of > grade 2 severity.
9. Known HIV positivity or active infectious hepatitis, type A, B, or C. Primary AL
(immunoglobulin light chain) amyloidosis and myeloma complicated by amyloidosis.
- 1 A variety of other types of end organ dysfunctions can occasionally occur and
lead to a need for therapy. Such dysfunction is sufficient to support
classification as myeloma if proven to be myeloma-related.
- 2 A FCBP is a sexually mature woman who: 1) has not undergone a hysterectomy or
bilateral oophorectomy or 2) has not been naturally postmenopausal (i.e.,
amenorrhea following cancer therapy does not rule out childbearing potential) for
at least 24 consecutive months (i.e., has had menses at any time in the preceding
24 consecutive months).
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
Query!
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Phase 3
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Completed
Query!
Data analysis
Query!
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Query!
Other reasons
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
21/08/2008
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
14/07/2016
Query!
Sample size
Target
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
1623
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
SA,VIC
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
0
0
Royal Adelaide Hospital - Adelaide
Query!
Recruitment hospital [2]
0
0
Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Divsion of Haematology Medical Oncology - E. Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment hospital [3]
0
0
Western Hospital - Footscray
Query!
Recruitment hospital [4]
0
0
Frankston Hospital - Frankston
Query!
Recruitment hospital [5]
0
0
Flinders Medical Centre - Bedford Park
Query!
Recruitment hospital [6]
0
0
Geelong Hospital - Geelong
Query!
Recruitment hospital [7]
0
0
Gosford Hospital - Gosford
Query!
Recruitment hospital [8]
0
0
Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital - Herston
Query!
Recruitment hospital [9]
0
0
Cabrini Hospital - Malvern
Query!
Recruitment hospital [10]
0
0
The Royal Melbourne Hospital - Parkville
Query!
Recruitment hospital [11]
0
0
Royal Perth Hospital - Perth
Query!
Recruitment hospital [12]
0
0
Gold Coast Hospital - Southport
Query!
Recruitment hospital [13]
0
0
Royal North Shore Hospital - St Leonards
Query!
Recruitment hospital [14]
0
0
Westmead Hospital - Wentworthville
Query!
Recruitment hospital [15]
0
0
Border Medical Oncology - Wodonga
Query!
Recruitment hospital [16]
0
0
Wollongong Hospital - Wollongong
Query!
Recruitment hospital [17]
0
0
Princess Alexandra Hospital - Woolloongabba
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
0
0
5000 - Adelaide
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [2]
0
0
3002 - E. Melbourne
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [3]
0
0
3011 - Footscray
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [4]
0
0
3199 - Frankston
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [5]
0
0
5042 - Bedford Park
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [6]
0
0
3220 - Geelong
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [7]
0
0
2250 - Gosford
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [8]
0
0
4029 - Herston
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [9]
0
0
3144 - Malvern
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [10]
0
0
3050 - Parkville
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [11]
0
0
6000 - Perth
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [12]
0
0
4215 - Southport
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [13]
0
0
2065 - St Leonards
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [14]
0
0
2145 - Wentworthville
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [15]
0
0
3690 - Wodonga
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [16]
0
0
2500 - Wollongong
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [17]
0
0
4102 - Woolloongabba
Query!
Recruitment outside Australia
Country [1]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [1]
0
0
Alabama
Query!
Country [2]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [2]
0
0
California
Query!
Country [3]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [3]
0
0
Florida
Query!
Country [4]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [4]
0
0
Illinois
Query!
Country [5]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [5]
0
0
Kansas
Query!
Country [6]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [6]
0
0
Maine
Query!
Country [7]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [7]
0
0
Maryland
Query!
Country [8]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [8]
0
0
Minnesota
Query!
Country [9]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [9]
0
0
Montana
Query!
Country [10]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [10]
0
0
New York
Query!
Country [11]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [11]
0
0
North Dakota
Query!
Country [12]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [12]
0
0
Ohio
Query!
Country [13]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [13]
0
0
Oregon
Query!
Country [14]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [14]
0
0
Pennsylvania
Query!
Country [15]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [15]
0
0
Tennessee
Query!
Country [16]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [16]
0
0
Texas
Query!
Country [17]
0
0
United States of America
Query!
State/province [17]
0
0
Washington
Query!
Country [18]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [18]
0
0
Leoben
Query!
Country [19]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [19]
0
0
Linz
Query!
Country [20]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [20]
0
0
Salzburg
Query!
Country [21]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [21]
0
0
St. Pölten
Query!
Country [22]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [22]
0
0
Vienna
Query!
Country [23]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [23]
0
0
Wels
Query!
Country [24]
0
0
Austria
Query!
State/province [24]
0
0
Wiener Neustadt
Query!
Country [25]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [25]
0
0
Antwerpen
Query!
Country [26]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [26]
0
0
Arlon
Query!
Country [27]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [27]
0
0
Brugge
Query!
Country [28]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [28]
0
0
Brussels
Query!
Country [29]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [29]
0
0
Brussel
Query!
Country [30]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [30]
0
0
Bruxelles
Query!
Country [31]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [31]
0
0
Edegem
Query!
Country [32]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [32]
0
0
Gent
Query!
Country [33]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [33]
0
0
Hasselt
Query!
Country [34]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [34]
0
0
Leuven
Query!
Country [35]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [35]
0
0
Roeselare
Query!
Country [36]
0
0
Belgium
Query!
State/province [36]
0
0
Yvoir
Query!
Country [37]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [37]
0
0
Alberta
Query!
Country [38]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [38]
0
0
British Columbia
Query!
Country [39]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [39]
0
0
New Brunswick
Query!
Country [40]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [40]
0
0
Nova Scotia
Query!
Country [41]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [41]
0
0
Ontario
Query!
Country [42]
0
0
Canada
Query!
State/province [42]
0
0
Quebec
Query!
Country [43]
0
0
China
Query!
State/province [43]
0
0
Beijing
Query!
Country [44]
0
0
China
Query!
State/province [44]
0
0
Chengdu
Query!
Country [45]
0
0
China
Query!
State/province [45]
0
0
Shanghai
Query!
Country [46]
0
0
China
Query!
State/province [46]
0
0
Tianjin
Query!
Country [47]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [47]
0
0
Albi
Query!
Country [48]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [48]
0
0
Amiens
Query!
Country [49]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [49]
0
0
Angers cedex 01
Query!
Country [50]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [50]
0
0
Argenteuil
Query!
Country [51]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [51]
0
0
Bayonne
Query!
Country [52]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [52]
0
0
Blois cedex
Query!
Country [53]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [53]
0
0
Bobigny Cedex
Query!
Country [54]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [54]
0
0
Bordeaux
Query!
Country [55]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [55]
0
0
Bourg en Bresse cedex
Query!
Country [56]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [56]
0
0
Brest cedex
Query!
Country [57]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [57]
0
0
Caen cedex 5
Query!
Country [58]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [58]
0
0
Caen
Query!
Country [59]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [59]
0
0
Cannes Cedex
Query!
Country [60]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [60]
0
0
Cergy-Pontoise
Query!
Country [61]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [61]
0
0
Chalon/Saone Cedex
Query!
Country [62]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [62]
0
0
Clamart Cedex
Query!
Country [63]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [63]
0
0
Clamart
Query!
Country [64]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [64]
0
0
Clermont Ferrand
Query!
Country [65]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [65]
0
0
Colmar cedex
Query!
Country [66]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [66]
0
0
Creteil
Query!
Country [67]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [67]
0
0
Dijon
Query!
Country [68]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [68]
0
0
Dunkerque
Query!
Country [69]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [69]
0
0
Grenoble cedex 09
Query!
Country [70]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [70]
0
0
Grenoble
Query!
Country [71]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [71]
0
0
La Roche -Sur-Yon cedex 9
Query!
Country [72]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [72]
0
0
Le Chesnay Cedex
Query!
Country [73]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [73]
0
0
Le Havre
Query!
Country [74]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [74]
0
0
Le Kremlin bicetre CDX
Query!
Country [75]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [75]
0
0
Le Mans cedex
Query!
Country [76]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [76]
0
0
Le Mans
Query!
Country [77]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [77]
0
0
Lille cedex
Query!
Country [78]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [78]
0
0
Lille
Query!
Country [79]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [79]
0
0
Limoges Cedex 1
Query!
Country [80]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [80]
0
0
Lyon cedex
Query!
Country [81]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [81]
0
0
Lyon
Query!
Country [82]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [82]
0
0
Marseille Cedex 9
Query!
Country [83]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [83]
0
0
METZ cedex 3
Query!
Country [84]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [84]
0
0
Montauban cedex
Query!
Country [85]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [85]
0
0
Montpellier Cedex 5
Query!
Country [86]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [86]
0
0
Mulhouse
Query!
Country [87]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [87]
0
0
Nantes
Query!
Country [88]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [88]
0
0
Nice cedex 1
Query!
Country [89]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [89]
0
0
Nice cedex 3
Query!
Country [90]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [90]
0
0
Orleans
Query!
Country [91]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [91]
0
0
Paris Cedex 14
Query!
Country [92]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [92]
0
0
Paris
Query!
Country [93]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [93]
0
0
Pessac
Query!
Country [94]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [94]
0
0
Poitiers cedex
Query!
Country [95]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [95]
0
0
Reims cedex
Query!
Country [96]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [96]
0
0
Reims
Query!
Country [97]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [97]
0
0
Rennes cedex 02
Query!
Country [98]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [98]
0
0
Rennes Cedex
Query!
Country [99]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [99]
0
0
Rodez
Query!
Country [100]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [100]
0
0
Rouen cedex
Query!
Country [101]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [101]
0
0
Saint Cloud
Query!
Country [102]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [102]
0
0
St Priest en Jarez
Query!
Country [103]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [103]
0
0
St-Brieuc cedex 1
Query!
Country [104]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [104]
0
0
Strasbourg
Query!
Country [105]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [105]
0
0
Toulouse cedex 9
Query!
Country [106]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [106]
0
0
Tours cedex
Query!
Country [107]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [107]
0
0
Tours
Query!
Country [108]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [108]
0
0
Vandoeuvre Cedex
Query!
Country [109]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [109]
0
0
Vannes cedex
Query!
Country [110]
0
0
France
Query!
State/province [110]
0
0
Villejuif
Query!
Country [111]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [111]
0
0
Dresden
Query!
Country [112]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [112]
0
0
Dusseldorf
Query!
Country [113]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [113]
0
0
Essen
Query!
Country [114]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [114]
0
0
Frankfurt am Main
Query!
Country [115]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [115]
0
0
Giessen
Query!
Country [116]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [116]
0
0
Greifswald
Query!
Country [117]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [117]
0
0
Hamburg
Query!
Country [118]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [118]
0
0
Jena
Query!
Country [119]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [119]
0
0
Leipzig
Query!
Country [120]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [120]
0
0
Lübeck
Query!
Country [121]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [121]
0
0
Muenster
Query!
Country [122]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [122]
0
0
München
Query!
Country [123]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [123]
0
0
Rostock
Query!
Country [124]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [124]
0
0
Stuttgart
Query!
Country [125]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [125]
0
0
Tübingen
Query!
Country [126]
0
0
Germany
Query!
State/province [126]
0
0
Ulm
Query!
Country [127]
0
0
Greece
Query!
State/province [127]
0
0
Athens
Query!
Country [128]
0
0
Greece
Query!
State/province [128]
0
0
Piraeus
Query!
Country [129]
0
0
Greece
Query!
State/province [129]
0
0
Thessaloniki
Query!
Country [130]
0
0
Ireland
Query!
State/province [130]
0
0
Dublin
Query!
Country [131]
0
0
Ireland
Query!
State/province [131]
0
0
Galway
Query!
Country [132]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [132]
0
0
Bologna
Query!
Country [133]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [133]
0
0
Catanzaro
Query!
Country [134]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [134]
0
0
Genova
Query!
Country [135]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [135]
0
0
Lecce
Query!
Country [136]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [136]
0
0
Matera
Query!
Country [137]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [137]
0
0
Milano
Query!
Country [138]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [138]
0
0
Modena
Query!
Country [139]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [139]
0
0
Napoli
Query!
Country [140]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [140]
0
0
Palermo
Query!
Country [141]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [141]
0
0
Pavia 2
Query!
Country [142]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [142]
0
0
Piacenza
Query!
Country [143]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [143]
0
0
Pisa
Query!
Country [144]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [144]
0
0
Reggio Emilia
Query!
Country [145]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [145]
0
0
Roma
Query!
Country [146]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [146]
0
0
Rome
Query!
Country [147]
0
0
Italy
Query!
State/province [147]
0
0
Torino
Query!
Country [148]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [148]
0
0
Anyang
Query!
Country [149]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [149]
0
0
Busan
Query!
Country [150]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [150]
0
0
Daegu
Query!
Country [151]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [151]
0
0
Daejon
Query!
Country [152]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [152]
0
0
Gyeonggi-do
Query!
Country [153]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [153]
0
0
Hwasun-goon
Query!
Country [154]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [154]
0
0
Incheon
Query!
Country [155]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [155]
0
0
Jeonju
Query!
Country [156]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [156]
0
0
Seongnam
Query!
Country [157]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [157]
0
0
Seongsanno
Query!
Country [158]
0
0
Korea, Republic of
Query!
State/province [158]
0
0
Seoul
Query!
Country [159]
0
0
New Zealand
Query!
State/province [159]
0
0
Auckland
Query!
Country [160]
0
0
New Zealand
Query!
State/province [160]
0
0
Christchurch
Query!
Country [161]
0
0
New Zealand
Query!
State/province [161]
0
0
Newtown
Query!
Country [162]
0
0
Portugal
Query!
State/province [162]
0
0
Braga
Query!
Country [163]
0
0
Portugal
Query!
State/province [163]
0
0
Coimbra
Query!
Country [164]
0
0
Portugal
Query!
State/province [164]
0
0
Lisboa
Query!
Country [165]
0
0
Portugal
Query!
State/province [165]
0
0
Porto
Query!
Country [166]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [166]
0
0
Badalona (Barcelona)
Query!
Country [167]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [167]
0
0
Barcelona
Query!
Country [168]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [168]
0
0
Cordoba
Query!
Country [169]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [169]
0
0
Girona
Query!
Country [170]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [170]
0
0
Madrid
Query!
Country [171]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [171]
0
0
Murcia
Query!
Country [172]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [172]
0
0
Málaga
Query!
Country [173]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [173]
0
0
Palma de Mallorca
Query!
Country [174]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [174]
0
0
Pamplona
Query!
Country [175]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [175]
0
0
Reus
Query!
Country [176]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [176]
0
0
San Sebastian
Query!
Country [177]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [177]
0
0
Santander
Query!
Country [178]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [178]
0
0
Santiago de Compostela
Query!
Country [179]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [179]
0
0
Valencia
Query!
Country [180]
0
0
Spain
Query!
State/province [180]
0
0
Zaragoza
Query!
Country [181]
0
0
Sweden
Query!
State/province [181]
0
0
Linkoping
Query!
Country [182]
0
0
Sweden
Query!
State/province [182]
0
0
Stockholm
Query!
Country [183]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [183]
0
0
Aarau
Query!
Country [184]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [184]
0
0
Basel
Query!
Country [185]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [185]
0
0
Berne
Query!
Country [186]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [186]
0
0
Chur
Query!
Country [187]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [187]
0
0
Lausanne
Query!
Country [188]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [188]
0
0
Münsterlingen (TG)
Query!
Country [189]
0
0
Switzerland
Query!
State/province [189]
0
0
Winterthur
Query!
Country [190]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [190]
0
0
Taichung City
Query!
Country [191]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [191]
0
0
Taipei
Query!
Country [192]
0
0
Taiwan
Query!
State/province [192]
0
0
Tapei
Query!
Country [193]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [193]
0
0
Bangor
Query!
Country [194]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [194]
0
0
Bath
Query!
Country [195]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [195]
0
0
Belfast Northern Ireland
Query!
Country [196]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [196]
0
0
Birmingham West Midlands
Query!
Country [197]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [197]
0
0
Bournemouth Dorset
Query!
Country [198]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [198]
0
0
Bristol
Query!
Country [199]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [199]
0
0
Cambridge
Query!
Country [200]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [200]
0
0
Cardiff
Query!
Country [201]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [201]
0
0
Glasgow
Query!
Country [202]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [202]
0
0
London
Query!
Country [203]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [203]
0
0
Oxford
Query!
Country [204]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [204]
0
0
Plymouth Crownhill Devon
Query!
Country [205]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [205]
0
0
Sheffield
Query!
Country [206]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [206]
0
0
West Yorkshire
Query!
Country [207]
0
0
United Kingdom
Query!
State/province [207]
0
0
Wolverhampton
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Primary sponsor type
Commercial sector/Industry
Query!
Name
Celgene
Query!
Address
Query!
Country
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of Lenalidomide plus low dose
dexamethasone to that of the combination of melphalan, prednisone and thalidomide.
Query!
Trial website
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00689936
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Dimopoulos MA, Cheung MC, Roussel M, Liu T, Gamberi B, Kolb B, Derigs HG, Eom H, Belhadj K, Lenain P, Van der Jagt R, Rigaudeau S, Dib M, Hall R, Jardel H, Jaccard A, Tosikyan A, Karlin L, Bensinger W, Schots R, Leupin N, Chen G, Marek J, Ervin-Haynes A, Facon T. Impact of renal impairment on outcomes with lenalidomide and dexamethasone treatment in the FIRST trial, a randomized, open-label phase 3 trial in transplant-ineligible patients with multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2016 Mar;101(3):363-70. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2015.133629. Epub 2015 Dec 11.
Hulin C, Belch A, Shustik C, Petrucci MT, Duhrsen U, Lu J, Song K, Rodon P, Pegourie B, Garderet L, Hunter H, Azais I, Eek R, Gisslinger H, Macro M, Dakhil S, Goncalves C, LeBlanc R, Romeril K, Royer B, Doyen C, Leleu X, Offner F, Leupin N, Houck V, Chen G, Ervin-Haynes A, Dimopoulos MA, Facon T. Updated Outcomes and Impact of Age With Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone or Melphalan, Prednisone, and Thalidomide in the Randomized, Phase III FIRST Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016 Oct 20;34(30):3609-3617. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.7295.
Delforge M, Minuk L, Eisenmann JC, Arnulf B, Canepa L, Fragasso A, Leyvraz S, Langer C, Ezaydi Y, Vogl DT, Giraldo-Castellano P, Yoon SS, Zarnitsky C, Escoffre-Barbe M, Lemieux B, Song K, Bahlis NJ, Guo S, Monzini MS, Ervin-Haynes A, Houck V, Facon T. Health-related quality-of-life in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the FIRST trial: lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone versus melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide. Haematologica. 2015 Jun;100(6):826-33. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2014.120121. Epub 2015 Mar 13.
Benboubker L, Dimopoulos MA, Dispenzieri A, Catalano J, Belch AR, Cavo M, Pinto A, Weisel K, Ludwig H, Bahlis N, Banos A, Tiab M, Delforge M, Cavenagh J, Geraldes C, Lee JJ, Chen C, Oriol A, de la Rubia J, Qiu L, White DJ, Binder D, Anderson K, Fermand JP, Moreau P, Attal M, Knight R, Chen G, Van Oostendorp J, Jacques C, Ervin-Haynes A, Avet-Loiseau H, Hulin C, Facon T; FIRST Trial Team. Lenalidomide and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible patients with myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2014 Sep 4;371(10):906-17. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1402551.
Vogl DT, Delforge M, Song K, Guo S, Gibson CJ, Ervin-Haynes A, Facon T. Long-term health-related quality of life in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma receiving lenalidomide and dexamethasone. Leuk Lymphoma. 2018 Feb;59(2):398-405. doi: 10.1080/10428194.2017.1334125. Epub 2017 Jun 22.
Dumontet C, Hulin C, Dimopoulos MA, Belch A, Dispenzieri A, Ludwig H, Rodon P, Van Droogenbroeck J, Qiu L, Cavo M, Van de Velde A, Lahuerta JJ, Allangba O, Lee JH, Boyle E, Perrot A, Moreau P, Manier S, Attal M, Roussel M, Mohty M, Mary JY, Civet A, Costa B, Tinel A, Gaston-Mathe Y, Facon T. A predictive model for risk of early grade >/= 3 infection in patients with multiple myeloma not eligible for transplant: analysis of the FIRST trial. Leukemia. 2018 Jun;32(6):1404-1413. doi: 10.1038/s41375-018-0133-x. Epub 2018 Apr 26.
Ailawadhi S, Jacobus S, Sexton R, Stewart AK, Dispenzieri A, Hussein MA, Zonder JA, Crowley J, Hoering A, Barlogie B, Orlowski RZ, Rajkumar SV. Disease and outcome disparities in multiple myeloma: exploring the role of race/ethnicity in the Cooperative Group clinical trials. Blood Cancer J. 2018 Jul 6;8(7):67. doi: 10.1038/s41408-018-0102-7.
Jain T, Sonbol MB, Firwana B, Kolla KR, Almader-Douglas D, Palmer J, Fonseca R. High-Dose Chemotherapy with Early Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation Compared to Standard Dose Chemotherapy or Delayed Transplantation in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019 Feb;25(2):239-247. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.09.021. Epub 2018 Sep 20.
Facon T, Dimopoulos MA, Dispenzieri A, Catalano JV, Belch A, Cavo M, Pinto A, Weisel K, Ludwig H, Bahlis NJ, Banos A, Tiab M, Delforge M, Cavenagh JD, Geraldes C, Lee JJ, Chen C, Oriol A, De La Rubia J, White D, Binder D, Lu J, Anderson KC, Moreau P, Attal M, Perrot A, Arnulf B, Qiu L, Roussel M, Boyle E, Manier S, Mohty M, Avet-Loiseau H, Leleu X, Ervin-Haynes A, Chen G, Houck V, Benboubker L, Hulin C. Final analysis of survival outcomes in the phase 3 FIRST trial of up-front treatment for multiple myeloma. Blood. 2018 Jan 18;131(3):301-310. doi: 10.1182/blood-2017-07-795047. Epub 2017 Nov 17.
Ailawadhi S, DerSarkissian M, Duh MS, Lafeuille MH, Posner G, Ralston S, Zagadailov E, Ba-Mancini A, Rifkin R. Cost Offsets in the Treatment Journeys of Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma. Clin Ther. 2019 Mar;41(3):477-493.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.01.009. Epub 2019 Feb 14.
Pegourie B, Karlin L, Benboubker L, Orsini-Piocelle F, Tiab M, Auger-Quittet S, Rodon P, Royer B, Leleu X, Bareau B, Cliquennois M, Fuzibet JG, Voog E, Belhadj-Merzoug K, Decaux O, Rey P, Slama B, Leyronnas C, Zarnitsky C, Boyle E, Bosson JL, Pernod G; IFM Group. Apixaban for the prevention of thromboembolism in immunomodulatory-treated myeloma patients: Myelaxat, a phase 2 pilot study. Am J Hematol. 2019 Jun;94(6):635-640. doi: 10.1002/ajh.25459. Epub 2019 Apr 1.
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
0
0
Christian Jacques, MD
Query!
Address
0
0
Celgene Corporation
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
0
0
Query!
Address
0
0
Query!
Country
0
0
Query!
Phone
0
0
Query!
Fax
0
0
Query!
Email
0
0
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Summary Results
For IPD and results data, please see
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00689936
Download to PDF