Skip to main content
. 2025 Aug 8;138(19):2399–2410. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000003655

Table 2.

Comparative analysis of clinical trial outcomes for RRMM.

Treatment regimens Study Number of patients enrolled Median number of lines of therapy Median follow-up time (months) Objective response rate (%) CR rate (%) MRD negativity rate (%) Median time to response (months) Median PFS (months)
Sd STORM[44] 122 7 8.3 26 2 NA 1 3.7
DPd EQUULEUS/MMY1001[36] 103 4 13.1 60 17 NA 1 8.8
EPD ELOQUENT-3[38] 60 3 9.1 53 8 NA 2 10.3
IsaPd ICARIA-MM[35] 154 3 11.6 60 5 NA 1 11.5
DKd CANDOR[33] 312 2 16.9 84.3 29 NA 1 28.6
DVd CASTOR[51] 251 2 19.4 83.8 28.8 11.6 16.7
PVd OPTIMISMM[52] 281 2 15.9 82.2 15.7 NA 0.9 11.2

CR: Complete response; DKd: Daratumumab combined with carfilzomib and dexamethasone; DPd: Daratumumab combined with pomalidomide and dexamethasone; DVd: Daratumumab combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone; EPd: Elotuzumab combined with pomalidomide and dexamethasone; IsaPd: Isatuximab combined with pomalidomide and dexamethasone; NA: Not available; MM: Multiple myeloma; MRD: Minimal residual disease; PFS: Progression-free survival; Pvd: Pomalidomide combined with bortezomib and dexamethasone; RRMM: relapsed/refractory MM; Sd: Selinexor combined with dexamethasone; Vd: Bortezomib combined with dexamethasone.