RNA-seq of newly diagnosed patients in the PADIMAC study leads to a bortezomib/lenalidomide decision signature

14Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Improving outcomes in multiple myeloma will involve not only development of new therapies but also better use of existing treatments. We performed RNA sequencing on samples from newly diagnosed patients enrolled in the phase 2 PADIMAC (Bortezomib, Adriamycin, and Dexamethasone Therapy for Previously Untreated Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Impact of Minimal Residual Disease in Patients with Deferred ASCT) study. Using synthetic annealing and the large margin nearest neighbor algorithm, we developed and trained a 7-gene signature to predict treatment outcome. We tested the signature in independent cohorts treated with bortezomib- and lenalidomide-based therapies. The signature was capable of distinguishing which patients would respond better to which regimen. In the CoMMpass data set, patients who were treated correctly according to the signature had a better progression-free survival (median, 20.1 months vs not reached; hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; confidence interval [CI], 0.23-0.72; P 5 .0012) and overall survival (median, 30.7 months vs not reached; HR, 0.41; CI, 0.21-0.80; P 5 .0049) than those who were not. Indeed, the outcome for these correctly treated patients was noninferior to that for those treated with combined bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, arguably the standard of care in the United States but not widely available elsewhere. The small size of the signature will facilitate clinical translation, thus enabling more targeted drug regimens to be delivered in myeloma. (Blood. 2018;132(20):2154-2165)

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chapman, M. A., Sive, J., Ambrose, J., Roddie, C., Counsell, N., Lach, A., … Yong, K. (2018). RNA-seq of newly diagnosed patients in the PADIMAC study leads to a bortezomib/lenalidomide decision signature. Blood, 132(20), 2154–2165. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-05-849893

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free