2006
DOI: 10.1038/sj.leu.2404284
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

15
1,832
5
34

Year Published

2008
2008
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2,364 publications
(1,925 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
15
1,832
5
34
Order By: Relevance
“…Key inclusion criteria included measurable, symptomatic MM according to International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria (Durie et al , 2006); RRMM after receiving ≥2 lines of therapy (including a PI or IMiD), including lack of response or disease progression (according to IMWG response criteria; Rajkumar et al , 2014) to the most recent line of therapy; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤1. Key exclusion criteria were an absolute neutrophil count <0·75 × 10 9 /l; platelet count <50 × 10 9 /l; creatinine level >221 μmol/l; peripheral neuropathy grade ≥2; and a need for concomitant warfarin or other vitamin K antagonists or strong CYP3A4/5 inhibitors (Indiana University Department of Medicine 2016).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Key inclusion criteria included measurable, symptomatic MM according to International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria (Durie et al , 2006); RRMM after receiving ≥2 lines of therapy (including a PI or IMiD), including lack of response or disease progression (according to IMWG response criteria; Rajkumar et al , 2014) to the most recent line of therapy; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤1. Key exclusion criteria were an absolute neutrophil count <0·75 × 10 9 /l; platelet count <50 × 10 9 /l; creatinine level >221 μmol/l; peripheral neuropathy grade ≥2; and a need for concomitant warfarin or other vitamin K antagonists or strong CYP3A4/5 inhibitors (Indiana University Department of Medicine 2016).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The primary end point of the study was CBR, defined as the proportion of patients achieving an MR or better as assessed by investigator per modified IMWG criteria (Durie et al , 2006; Anderson et al , 2008). The primary efficacy analysis was performed on the all‐treated population.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Key secondary endpoints included the overall response rate (ORR; defined as partial response or better), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), time to second‐line anti‐myeloma therapy and safety. Progression and response were evaluated using the International Myeloma Working Group criteria (Durie et al , 2006) and reviewed by an independent response‐adjudication committee. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0 (National Cancer Institute, 2006).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Myeloma disease response was assessed by the individual investigators in accordance with IMWG uniform criteria (Durie et al , 2006). A single bone marrow assessment was performed to document complete responses (CRs).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%