Raw Data Library
About
Aims and ScopeAdvisory Board Members
More
Who We Are?
User Guide
Green Science
​
​
EN
Kurumsal BaşvuruSign inGet started
​
​

About
Aims and ScopeAdvisory Board Members
More
Who We Are?
User GuideGreen Science

Language

Kurumsal Başvuru

Sign inGet started
RDL logo

Verified research datasets. Instant access. Built for collaboration.

Navigation

About

Aims and Scope

Advisory Board Members

More

Who We Are?

Contact

Add Raw Data

User Guide

Legal

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Support

Got an issue? Email us directly.

Email: info@rawdatalibrary.netOpen Mail App
​
​

© 2026 Raw Data Library. All rights reserved.
PrivacyTermsContact
  1. Raw Data Library
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Comparative Effectiveness of Linvoseltamab Versus Current Real-World (RW) Standard-of-Care (SOC) Therapies in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Key Subgroups Analysis

Verified authors • Institutional access • DOI aware
50,000+ researchers120,000+ datasets90% satisfaction
Article
en
2024

Comparative Effectiveness of Linvoseltamab Versus Current Real-World (RW) Standard-of-Care (SOC) Therapies in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Key Subgroups Analysis

0 Datasets

0 Files

en
2024
Vol 144 (Supplement 1)
Vol. 144
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2024-200679

Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.

Create free accountHow it works

Frequently asked questions

Is access really free for academics and students?

Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.

How is my data protected?

Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.

Can I request additional materials?

Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.

Advance your research today

Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.

Get free academic accessLearn more
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaboration
Access Research Data

Join our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.

Get Free Access
Institutional SSO
Secure
This PDF is not available in different languages.
No localized PDFs are currently available.
Meletios A Dimopoulos
Meletios A Dimopoulos

Institution not specified

Verified
Shaji Kumar
Sundar Jagannath
Katja Weisel
+37 more

Abstract

Introduction Linvoseltamab is an investigational, BCMA×CD3 bispecific antibody designed for the treatment of RRMM. High objective response rates (ORR) to linvoseltamab 200 mg in the LINKER-MM1 trial (NCT03761108) were demonstrated across high-risk subgroups, including patients aged ≥75 years, patients with high-risk cytogenetics, and patients with penta-class refractory status. The aim of this study was to compare ORR, overall and in key subgroups, between patients in Phase 2 of the LINKER-MM1 trial and patients in an international RW SOC external control arm (ECA). Methods The ECA was derived from a chart review of 16 academic sites across 10 countries that are part of the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF)-International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) and 2 US electronic health record databases (COTA and Guardian Research Network [GRN]). Included patients initiated ≥1 anti-MM treatment after meeting key eligibility criteria of LINKER-MM1. Weighted random sampling and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to select 1 line of therapy (LOT) per patient and balance the overall ECA and trial populations on prespecified prognostic factors (Kumar S, et al. IMS 2023). For ORR assessment, LINKER-MM1 and IMF-IMWG used independent central review committees per IMWG criteria, COTA used algorithmic assessment based on IMWG criteria, and GRN used physician-assessed responses. Prior to conducting comparative analyses, an independent committee of epidemiology and oncology experts reviewed the comparability of the cohorts and endpoint assessments, and approved study continuation. ORR among patients in LINKER-MM1 and patients in the ECA was compared overall and across prespecified subgroups (≥10 patients per subgroup), including age, race, cytogenetic risk score, international Staging System (ISS), presence of extramedullary plasmacytoma (EMP), refractory class, bone marrow plasma cell (BMPC) proportion, and number of prior LOTs. Results Median duration of follow-up was 14.3 months (data cut-off: January 6, 2024) for patients receiving linvoseltamab (n=105) and 13.6 months for the ECA (n=307; n=194, n=72, and n=41 from IMF-IMWG, COTA, and GRN, respectively). Following IPTW, 13 prognostic factors with <30% missingness were balanced between cohorts, with an effective sample size in the ECA of 197. After adjustment, ORR was significantly higher in patients who received linvoseltamab compared with patients in the ECA (69.5% vs 45.7%, odds ratio [OR] 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-4.1]) and in key subgroups with age 65-74 years (76.9% vs 48.3%, OR 3.6 [1.6-8.6]), age ≥75 years (72.4% vs 48.5%, OR 2.8 [1.1-7.4]), Black or African American race (82.4% vs 25.0%, OR 14.0 [3.0-85.4]), White race (68.9% vs 49.7%, OR 2.2 [1.3-4.0]), standard cytogenetic risk (72.3% vs 51.3%, OR 2.5 [1.3-4.8]), ISS stage III (58.8% vs 19.7%, OR 5.8 [1.5-25.2]), absence of EMP (71.6% vs 49.3%, OR 2.6 [1.5-4.6]), triple-class refractory status (68.2% vs 45.7%, OR 2.6 [1.5-4.4]), quadruple-class refractory status (66.7% vs 45.9%, OR 2.4 [1.3-4.3]), 4-5 prior LOTs (65.1% vs 40.4%, OR 2.8 [1.3-6.0]), and >5 prior LOTs (75.7% vs 36.1%, OR 5.5 [2.4-13.6]). Numerically higher (not statistically significant) or similar ORR was observed for patients receiving linvoseltamab compared with patients in the ECA with age <65 years (59.5% vs 46.8%, OR 1.7 [0.79-3.6]), high-risk cytogenetics (65.0% vs 63.1%, OR 1.1 [0.41-2.9]), ISS stage I (73.3% vs 64.6%, OR 1.5 [0.62-3.7]), ISS stage II (67.6% vs 53.5%, OR 1.8 [0.72-4.7]), presence of EMP (58.8% vs 56.9%, OR 1.1 [0.32-3.8]), penta-class refractory status (64.3% vs 48.5%, OR 1.9 [0.78-4.8]), BMPC <50% (77.0% vs 67.2%, OR 1.6 [0.61-4.3]), BMPC ≥50% (41.7% vs 36.0%, OR 1.3 [0.36-4.7]), and ≤3 prior LOTs (68.0% vs 66.4%, OR 1.1 [0.43-2.9]). Separate findings will be presented for IMF-IMWG and COTA/GRN data at the congress. Conclusions Linvoseltamab induced better ORR vs RW SOC treatments overall, and better or similar ORR in the key subgroups assessed, highlighting its therapeutic value across a range of patients with RRMM with heterogeneous risk profiles and levels of disease burden.

How to cite this publication

Shaji Kumar, Sundar Jagannath, Katja Weisel, Laura Rosiñol Dachs, Meletios A Dimopoulos, David S. Siegel, Jorge Monge, Xavier Leleu, Juan Du, Javier de la Rubia, Jae Hoon Lee, María‐Victoria Mateos, Borja Puertas Martínez, Alessandro Gozzetti, Dominik Dytfeld, Enrique M. Ocio, Joan Bladé, Shuji Ozaki, Meral Beksaç, Fernando Escalante, Madhu Nagaraj, Rafla Hassan, Paul Spin, Nicolle Bonar, Mostafa Shokoohi, Muhaimen Siddiqui, Di Wang, Kevin Hou, Jeannette Green, Olivier Humblet, Alexander Breskin, James Harnett, Wenzhen Ge, Rachel E. Sobel, Jessica J. Jalbert, Glenn S. Kroog, Karen Rodriguez Lorenc, Qiufei Ma, Christian Hampp, Brian G.M. Durie (2024). Comparative Effectiveness of Linvoseltamab Versus Current Real-World (RW) Standard-of-Care (SOC) Therapies in Triple-Class Exposed Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Key Subgroups Analysis. , 144(Supplement 1), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2024-200679.

Related publications

Why join Raw Data Library?

Quality

Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.

Control

Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.

Free for Academia

Students and faculty get instant access after verification.

Publication Details

Type

Article

Year

2024

Authors

40

Datasets

0

Total Files

0

Language

en

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2024-200679

Join Research Community

Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.

Get Free Access