0 Datasets
0 Files
Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.
Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.
Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.
Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.
Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaborationJoin our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.
Get Free Access7510 Background: The randomized Phase 3 CANOVA study’s (NCT03539744) primary analysis showed multiple numerically improved efficacy endpoints with VenDex v PomDex, but the primary endpoint of mPFS by IRC was not statistically significant. Here, we report correlative biomarker analyses from CANOVA. Methods: CANOVA is a randomized, global, open-label Phase 3 study of VenDex v PomDex in pts with t(11;14)+ RRMM and ≥2 prior lines of therapy (LOTs). The primary endpoint was mPFS by IRC. Key secondary endpoints included ORR, ≥VGPR, mOS, and MRD negativity (<10 -5 ). In post hoc mPFS sensitivity analysis, disease progression, death, and start of next LOT were defined as events. BCL2 gene expression by RNAseq (3.7 log2 FPKM prespecified median cutoff for BCL2 high v BCL2 low ) and chr1q abnormalities by whole-exome sequencing (normal, gain, or amp) were assessed centrally from pretreatment, CD138-enriched BM aspirates. Results: mPFS, post hoc mPFS, and mOS in the VenDex arm were similar by BCL2 status, with numerically higher ORR, ≥VGPR, and MRD negativity rates in the BCL2 high subgroup. In contrast, mPFS and mOS within the PomDex arm were numerically longer in the BCL2 low subgroup, despite equal ORR in both subgroups (Table). Presence of 1q abnormalities was evenly distributed across BCL2 high v BCL2 low subgroups in the VenDex arm (51% v 45%) but not in the PomDex arm (59% v 31%). Normal 1q and gain(1q) subgroups had numerically improved mPFS, mOS, ORR, ≥VGPR, and MRD negativity with VenDex; pts with amp(1q) had poor outcomes regardless of treatment, albeit the sample size was small. Conclusions: Pts with BCL2 high or gain(1q) had numerically improved clinical efficacy with VenDex v PomDex. Clinical benefit was consistent across BCL2 subgroups ( BCL2 high or BCL2 low ) with VenDex but not PomDex. Pts with amp(1q) fared poorly irrespective of treatment arm. Clinical trial information: NCT03539744 . [Table: see text]
Nizar J. Bahlis, Rakesh Popat, Meral Beksaç, Meletios A Dimopoulos, Moshe E. Gatt, Francesca Gay, Jae‐Cheol Jo, Prashant Kapoor, K. Martin Kortüm, Silvia Ling, Chandramouli Nagarajan, Kenshi Suzuki, Maika Onishi, Monique Dail, Emily L. Rossi, Xizhi Luo, Emma Arriola, Orlando F. Bueno, Jeremy A. Ross, María‐Victoria Mateos (2024). Efficacy of venetoclax-dexamethasone (VenDex) v pomalidomide-dexamethasone (PomDex) in patients (Pts) with t(11;14)-positive relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma [t(11;14)+ RRMM]: Phase 3 CANOVA study biomarker subgroup analysis.. , 42(16_suppl), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.7510.
Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.
Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.
Students and faculty get instant access after verification.
Type
Article
Year
2024
Authors
20
Datasets
0
Total Files
0
Language
en
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.7510
Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.
Get Free Access