Revision history
Back to the articleThese are preserved drafts. Earlier evidence may have changed; use the current reading to check availability.
Revision 1 · Daratumumab combination produced more deep treatment responses
Saved 2026-09-15 · Not clinically reviewed
Read this saved revision and its sources
Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were not having an initial transplant received a combination including daratumumab or the comparison combination without it. More patients receiving daratumumab reached complete response or better and tested negative for minimal residual disease. These responses were more often sustained, while progression-free survival among patients testing negative showed only a nonsignificant trend favoring daratumumab. The trial enrolled patients who were transplant-ineligible or deferred transplant as initial therapy, so it does not establish the same result for all newly diagnosed patients. Among patients who achieved minimal-residual-disease negativity, the progression-free-survival difference was not statistically significant, so an advantage in that subgroup remains uncertain. The median follow-up was 58.7 months, so outcomes beyond that period are not established.
Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were not having an initial transplant received a combination including daratumumab or the comparison combination without it. More patients receiving daratumumab reached complete response or better and tested negative for minimal residual disease. These responses were more often sustained, while progression-free survival among patients testing negative showed only a nonsignificant trend favoring daratumumab.
What the study found
Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were not having an initial transplant received a combination including daratumumab or the comparison combination without it. More patients receiving daratumumab reached complete response or better and tested negative for minimal residual disease. These responses were more often sustained, while progression-free survival among patients testing negative showed only a nonsignificant trend favoring daratumumab.
With median follow-up of 58.7 months, overall minimal-residual-disease negativity at the 10-5 threshold was 60.9% with D-VRd and 39.4% with VRd.
Who and what was studied
Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who were transplant-ineligible or deferred transplant as initial therapy.
D-VRd, containing daratumumab, bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone, was compared with VRd.
What remains uncertain
The trial enrolled patients who were transplant-ineligible or deferred transplant as initial therapy, so it does not establish the same result for all newly diagnosed patients. Among patients who achieved minimal-residual-disease negativity, the progression-free-survival difference was not statistically significant, so an advantage in that subgroup remains uncertain. The median follow-up was 58.7 months, so outcomes beyond that period are not established.
Which parts of this research are relevant to the questions I should discuss with my care team?