A B S T R A C T PurposeWe investigated whether bortezomib during induction and maintenance improves survival in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Patients and MethodsIn all, 827 eligible patients with newly diagnosed symptomatic MM were randomly assigned to receive induction therapy with vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (VAD) or bortezomib, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (PAD) followed by high-dose melphalan and autologous stemcell transplantation. Maintenance consisted of thalidomide 50 mg (VAD) once per day or bortezomib 1.3 mg/m 2 (PAD) once every 2 weeks for 2 years. The primary analysis was progression-free survival (PFS) adjusted for International Staging System (ISS) stage. ResultsComplete response (CR), including near CR, was superior after PAD induction (15% v 31%; P Ͻ .001) and bortezomib maintenance (34% v 49%; P Ͻ .001). After a median follow-up of 41 months, PFS was superior in the PAD arm (median of 28 months v 35 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.90; P ϭ .002). In multivariate analysis, overall survival (OS) was better in the PAD arm (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.00; P ϭ .049). In high-risk patients presenting with increased creatinine more than 2 mg/dL, bortezomib significantly improved PFS from a median of 13 months to 30 months (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.78; P ϭ .004) and OS from a median of 21 months to 54 months (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.65; P Ͻ .001). A benefit was also observed in patients with deletion 17p13 (median PFS, 12 v 22 months; HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26 to 0.86; P ϭ .01; median OS, 24 months v not reached at 54 months; HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.74; P ϭ .003). ConclusionBortezomib during induction and maintenance improves CR and achieves superior PFS and OS.

M a r t i n d e n H e u e r , M.D., T e d K o s t e r , M.D., H e n k J. B lo m , Ph.D., G e r a r d M.J. Bos, M.D., E r n e s t B r i ë t , M.D., P i e t e r H. R e its m a , P h .D ., J a n P. V a n d e n b r o ljo k e , M.D., and F rits R. R o sen d a a l, M .D .

World-wide, universities in health sciences have transformed their curriculum to include collaborative learning and facilitate the students’ learning process. Interaction has been acknowledged to be the synergistic element in this learning context. However, students spend the majority of their time outside their classroom and interaction does not stop outside the classroom. Therefore we studied how informal social interaction influences student learning. Moreover, to explore what really matters in the students learning process, a model was tested how the generally known important constructs—prior performance, motivation and social integration—relate to informal social interaction and student learning. 301 undergraduate medical students participated in this cross-sectional quantitative study. Informal social interaction was assessed using self-reported surveys following the network approach. Students’ individual motivation, social integration and prior performance were assessed by the Academic Motivation Scale, the College Adaption Questionnaire and students’ GPA respectively. A factual knowledge test represented student’ learning. All social networks were positively associated with student learning significantly: friendships (β = 0.11), providing information to other students (β = 0.16), receiving information from other students (β = 0.25). Structural equation modelling revealed a model in which social networks increased student learning (r = 0.43), followed by prior performance (r = 0.31). In contrast to prior literature, students’ academic motivation and social integration were not associated with students’ learning. Students’ informal social interaction is strongly associated with students’ learning. These findings underline the need to change our focus from the formal context (classroom) to the informal context to optimize student learning and deliver modern medics.

No abstract