To the editor:
In response to requests from readers1 we are providing additional analyses regarding whether taking patient size into account changes the conclusions from our paper in Blood.2 We performed time-dependent analyses of cumulative dosing of velcade, thalidomide, and dexamethasone (VTD) components with and without adjustment for baseline body surface area (BSA) both per date of publication and per follow-up as of April 20, 2012. Adjustments for BSA were performed by dividing the cumulative dose by BSA. These additional analyses allow a side-by-side comparison of the univariate models presented in our original publication2 with identical models adjusted for BSA, and clearly indicates that our conclusions regarding the importance of cumulative dosing stand, even when BSA is accounted for. Table 1 shows univariate analyses for overall survival and Table 2 for progression-free survival (PFS). Supplemental Tables 1, 2, and 3 (available on the Blood Web site; see the Supplemental Materials link at the top of the letter) present these data in the context of glucocorticoid receptor NR3C1 tertile expression levels.
OS with BSA-adjusted dosages . | OS without BSA-adjusted dosages . | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor . | n/N (%) . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . | Factor . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . |
Bortezomib during induction (mg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.78 (0.66, 0.91) | .002 | 0.84 (0.72, 0.98) | .032 | Bortezomib during induction (mg) | 0.88 (0.81, 0.96) | .003 | 0.90 (0.84, 0.98) | .013 |
Bortezomib during consolidation (mg/m2) | 232/303 (77) | 0.90 (0.83, 0.97) | .005 | 0.91 (0.85, 0.97) | .004 | Bortezomib during consolidation (mg) | 0.94 (0.90, 0.99) | .008 | 0.95 (0.91, 0.98) | .003 |
Bortezomib during maintenance (mg/m2) | 215/303 (71) | 0.99 (0.97, 1.00) | .071 | 0.99 (0.97, 1.00) | .050 | Bortezomib during maintenance (mg) | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .083 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .030 |
Dexamethasone during induction (dg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.62 (0.42, 0.92) | .017 | 0.71 (0.50, 1.02) | .066 | Dexamethasone during induction (dg) | 0.71 (0.56, 0.89) | .004 | 0.75 (0.60, 0.93) | .009 |
Dexamethasone during transplant (dg/m2) | 260/303 (86) | 0.89 (0.74, 1.07) | .206 | 0.87 (0.74, 1.02) | .090 | Dexamethasone during transplant (dg) | 0.94 (0.84, 1.04) | .210 | 0.91 (0.83, 1.00) | .051 |
Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg/m2) | 233/303 (77) | 0.75 (0.63, 0.89) | < .001 | 0.94 (0.83, 1.06) | .307 | Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg) | 0.85 (0.77, 0.93) | < .001 | 0.95 (0.89, 1.03) | .212 |
Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg/m2) | 211/303 (70) | 0.88 (0.82, 0.94) | < .001 | 0.91 (0.86, 0.96) | .001 | Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg) | 0.93 (0.89, 0.97) | < .001 | 0.95 (0.92, 0.98) | .001 |
Thalidomide during induction (g/m2) | 301/303 (99) | 0.52 (0.29, 0.94) | .031 | 0.62 (0.37, 1.05) | .075 | Thalidomide during induction (g) | 0.63 (0.44, 0.90) | .011 | 0.69 (0.50, 0.95) | .022 |
Thalidomide during transplant (g/m2) | 253/303 (84) | 0.88 (0.77, 1.02) | .080 | 0.89 (0.79, 1.00) | .055 | Thalidomide during transplant (g) | 0.94 (0.87, 1.02) | .118 | 0.93 (0.87, 1.00) | .053 |
Thalidomide during consolidation (g/m2) | 230/303 (76) | 0.89 (0.80, 0.99) | .036 | 0.95 (0.88, 1.03) | .231 | Thalidomide during consolidation (g) | 0.94 (0.89, 1.00) | .048 | 0.96 0.91, 1.00) | .073 |
Thalidomide during maintenance (g/m2) | 195/303 (64) | 0.97 (0.94, 1.01) | .101 | 0.98 (0.96, 1.01) | .179 | Thalidomide during maintenance (g) | 0.98 (0.97, 1.00) | .094 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .155 |
OS with BSA-adjusted dosages . | OS without BSA-adjusted dosages . | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor . | n/N (%) . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . | Factor . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . |
Bortezomib during induction (mg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.78 (0.66, 0.91) | .002 | 0.84 (0.72, 0.98) | .032 | Bortezomib during induction (mg) | 0.88 (0.81, 0.96) | .003 | 0.90 (0.84, 0.98) | .013 |
Bortezomib during consolidation (mg/m2) | 232/303 (77) | 0.90 (0.83, 0.97) | .005 | 0.91 (0.85, 0.97) | .004 | Bortezomib during consolidation (mg) | 0.94 (0.90, 0.99) | .008 | 0.95 (0.91, 0.98) | .003 |
Bortezomib during maintenance (mg/m2) | 215/303 (71) | 0.99 (0.97, 1.00) | .071 | 0.99 (0.97, 1.00) | .050 | Bortezomib during maintenance (mg) | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .083 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .030 |
Dexamethasone during induction (dg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.62 (0.42, 0.92) | .017 | 0.71 (0.50, 1.02) | .066 | Dexamethasone during induction (dg) | 0.71 (0.56, 0.89) | .004 | 0.75 (0.60, 0.93) | .009 |
Dexamethasone during transplant (dg/m2) | 260/303 (86) | 0.89 (0.74, 1.07) | .206 | 0.87 (0.74, 1.02) | .090 | Dexamethasone during transplant (dg) | 0.94 (0.84, 1.04) | .210 | 0.91 (0.83, 1.00) | .051 |
Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg/m2) | 233/303 (77) | 0.75 (0.63, 0.89) | < .001 | 0.94 (0.83, 1.06) | .307 | Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg) | 0.85 (0.77, 0.93) | < .001 | 0.95 (0.89, 1.03) | .212 |
Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg/m2) | 211/303 (70) | 0.88 (0.82, 0.94) | < .001 | 0.91 (0.86, 0.96) | .001 | Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg) | 0.93 (0.89, 0.97) | < .001 | 0.95 (0.92, 0.98) | .001 |
Thalidomide during induction (g/m2) | 301/303 (99) | 0.52 (0.29, 0.94) | .031 | 0.62 (0.37, 1.05) | .075 | Thalidomide during induction (g) | 0.63 (0.44, 0.90) | .011 | 0.69 (0.50, 0.95) | .022 |
Thalidomide during transplant (g/m2) | 253/303 (84) | 0.88 (0.77, 1.02) | .080 | 0.89 (0.79, 1.00) | .055 | Thalidomide during transplant (g) | 0.94 (0.87, 1.02) | .118 | 0.93 (0.87, 1.00) | .053 |
Thalidomide during consolidation (g/m2) | 230/303 (76) | 0.89 (0.80, 0.99) | .036 | 0.95 (0.88, 1.03) | .231 | Thalidomide during consolidation (g) | 0.94 (0.89, 1.00) | .048 | 0.96 0.91, 1.00) | .073 |
Thalidomide during maintenance (g/m2) | 195/303 (64) | 0.97 (0.94, 1.01) | .101 | 0.98 (0.96, 1.01) | .179 | Thalidomide during maintenance (g) | 0.98 (0.97, 1.00) | .094 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .155 |
The univariate time-dependent models for OS fail to show a confounding effect of BSA on the cumulative dosing of bortezemib, dexamethasone, and thalidomide. Hazard ratio estimates are consistent after accounting for BSA within the original data and the data with updated follow-up.
OS indicates overall survival; n, number receiving a dose during the specified step; N, total number of patients on TT3 (2003-33); HR, hazard ratio; BSA, body surface area; and CI, confidence interval.
Data as of April 20, 2012.
PFS with BSA-adjusted dosages . | PFS without BSA adjustment . | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor . | n/N (%) . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . | Factor . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . |
Bortezomib during induction (mg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.81 (0.70, 0.94) | .005 | 0.89 (0.78, 1.02) | .106 | Bortezomib during induction (mg) | 0.90 (0.83, 0.97) | .008 | 0.93 (0.87, 1.00) | .055 |
Bortezomib during consolidation (mg/m2) | 232/303 (77) | 0.92 (0.85, 0.99) | .019 | 0.94 (0.89, 1.00) | .038 | Bortezomib during consolidation (mg) | 0.96 (0.92, 1.00) | .039 | 0.97 (0.93, 1.00) | .034 |
Bortezomib during maintenance (mg/m2) | 215/303 (71) | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .219 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .165 | Bortezomib during maintenance (mg) | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) | .286 | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) | .134 |
Dexamethasone during induction (dg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.66 (0.46, 0.95) | .025 | 0.80 (0.58, 1.09) | .161 | Dexamethasone during induction (dg) | 0.75 (0.60, 0.94) | .011 | 0.82 (0.67, 1.00) | .047 |
Dexamethasone during transplant (dg/m2) | 260/303 (86) | 0.85 (0.72, 1.01) | .067 | 0.87 (0.76, 1.01) | .060 | Dexamethasone during transplant (dg) | 0.92 (0.83, 1.01) | .078 | 0.92 (0.85, 0.99) | .036 |
Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg/m2) | 233/303 (77) | 0.80 (0.69, 0.94) | .005 | 0.94 (0.84, 1.04) | .236 | Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg) | 0.89 (0.81, 0.97) | .007 | 0.95 (0.89, 1.02) | .165 |
Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg/m2) | 211/303 (70) | 0.93 (0.87, 0.99) | .029 | 0.92 (0.88, 0.97) | < .001 | Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg) | 0.97 (0.93, 1.00) | .047 | 0.96 (0.93, 0.98) | .001 |
Thalidomide during induction (g/m2) | 301/303 (99) | 0.57 (0.33, 0.97) | .039 | 0.75 (0.48, 1.16) | .191 | Thalidomide during induction (g) | 0.68 (0.50, 0.95) | .021 | 0.80 (0.62, 1.05) | .108 |
Thalidomide during transplant (g/m2) | 253/303 (84) | 0.88 (0.77, 1.00) | .046 | 0.91 (0.83, 1.01) | .083 | Thalidomide during transplant (g) | 0.94 (0.87, 1.01) | .071 | 0.95 (0.90, 1.01) | .084 |
Thalidomide during consolidation (g/m2) | 230/303 (76) | 0.93 (0.85, 1.02) | .142 | 0.95 (0.89, 1.02) | .171 | Thalidomide during consolidation (g) | 0.97 (0.92, 1.02) | .220 | 0.96 (0.92, 1.00) | .069 |
Thalidomide during maintenance (g/m2) | 195/303 (64) | 1.00 (0.97, 1.02) | .761 | 0.98 (0.96, 1.00) | .092 | Thalidomide during maintenance (g) | 1.00 (0.98, 1.01) | .824 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .095 |
PFS with BSA-adjusted dosages . | PFS without BSA adjustment . | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor . | n/N (%) . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . | Factor . | HR (95% CI) . | P . | HR (95% CI)* . | P* . |
Bortezomib during induction (mg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.81 (0.70, 0.94) | .005 | 0.89 (0.78, 1.02) | .106 | Bortezomib during induction (mg) | 0.90 (0.83, 0.97) | .008 | 0.93 (0.87, 1.00) | .055 |
Bortezomib during consolidation (mg/m2) | 232/303 (77) | 0.92 (0.85, 0.99) | .019 | 0.94 (0.89, 1.00) | .038 | Bortezomib during consolidation (mg) | 0.96 (0.92, 1.00) | .039 | 0.97 (0.93, 1.00) | .034 |
Bortezomib during maintenance (mg/m2) | 215/303 (71) | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .219 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .165 | Bortezomib during maintenance (mg) | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) | .286 | 1.00 (0.99, 1.00) | .134 |
Dexamethasone during induction (dg/m2) | 303/303 (100) | 0.66 (0.46, 0.95) | .025 | 0.80 (0.58, 1.09) | .161 | Dexamethasone during induction (dg) | 0.75 (0.60, 0.94) | .011 | 0.82 (0.67, 1.00) | .047 |
Dexamethasone during transplant (dg/m2) | 260/303 (86) | 0.85 (0.72, 1.01) | .067 | 0.87 (0.76, 1.01) | .060 | Dexamethasone during transplant (dg) | 0.92 (0.83, 1.01) | .078 | 0.92 (0.85, 0.99) | .036 |
Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg/m2) | 233/303 (77) | 0.80 (0.69, 0.94) | .005 | 0.94 (0.84, 1.04) | .236 | Dexamethasone during consolidation (dg) | 0.89 (0.81, 0.97) | .007 | 0.95 (0.89, 1.02) | .165 |
Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg/m2) | 211/303 (70) | 0.93 (0.87, 0.99) | .029 | 0.92 (0.88, 0.97) | < .001 | Dexamethasone during maintenance (dg) | 0.97 (0.93, 1.00) | .047 | 0.96 (0.93, 0.98) | .001 |
Thalidomide during induction (g/m2) | 301/303 (99) | 0.57 (0.33, 0.97) | .039 | 0.75 (0.48, 1.16) | .191 | Thalidomide during induction (g) | 0.68 (0.50, 0.95) | .021 | 0.80 (0.62, 1.05) | .108 |
Thalidomide during transplant (g/m2) | 253/303 (84) | 0.88 (0.77, 1.00) | .046 | 0.91 (0.83, 1.01) | .083 | Thalidomide during transplant (g) | 0.94 (0.87, 1.01) | .071 | 0.95 (0.90, 1.01) | .084 |
Thalidomide during consolidation (g/m2) | 230/303 (76) | 0.93 (0.85, 1.02) | .142 | 0.95 (0.89, 1.02) | .171 | Thalidomide during consolidation (g) | 0.97 (0.92, 1.02) | .220 | 0.96 (0.92, 1.00) | .069 |
Thalidomide during maintenance (g/m2) | 195/303 (64) | 1.00 (0.97, 1.02) | .761 | 0.98 (0.96, 1.00) | .092 | Thalidomide during maintenance (g) | 1.00 (0.98, 1.01) | .824 | 0.99 (0.98, 1.00) | .095 |
As seen with time-dependent models for OS, the univariate time-dependent models for PFS fail to show a confounding effect of BSA. Estimates of the hazard ratio remain consistent.
PFS indicates progression-free survival; n, number receiving a dose during the specified step; N, total number of patients on TT3 (2003-33); BSA, body surface area; HR, hazard ratio; and CI, confidence interval.
Data as of April 20, 2012.
It is important to note that these analyses using BSA adjustment are completely compatible with those previously published for bortezomib, as well as for dexamethasone and thalidomide. In each of these additional analyses, adjustment for BSA resulted in only minor changes to the hazard ratios. Therefore we believe the relationship between cumulative dosing and outcomes does not simply reflect impact of body size on outcomes.
Authorship
The online version of this letter contains a data supplement.
Conflict-of-interest disclosure: B.B. has received research funding from Celgene, Novartis. Centocor, Johnson and Johnson, Onyx, and ICON; is a consultant to Celgene, Millenium, and Genzyme; and has received speaking honoraria from Celgene and Millennium. He is a coinventor on patents and patent applications related to the use of GEP in cancer medicine and holds interest in Signal Genetics. The remaining author declares no competing financial interests.
Correspondence: Dr Bart Barlogie, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 W Markham St, Slot 816, Little Rock, AR 72205; e-mail: barlogiebart@uams.edu.
References
National Institutes of Health