Evaluation of daratumumab for treating multiple myeloma in patients with high-risk cytogenetic factors: A pooled analysis using synthetic individual patient data.

e19554 Background: Adding daratumumab to standard multiple myeloma (MM) regimens improves response rates and clinical outcomes. Systematic reviews (meta-analyses) allow further evaluation of its effectiveness in MM patients with high-risk cytogenetic factors but are limited by model assumptions. his study addresses these limitations using a novel synthetic individual patient data (SynIPD) generation algorithm to enable a more robust analysis. Methods: Advances in AI have enabled the creation of synthetic data that mimics the statistical properties of real patient data, empowering aggregated analyses of clinical trials. This study focuses on newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) and relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) patients with high-risk cytogenetic profiles. Six studies were included: ALCYONE, CASSIOPEIA, and MAIA for NDMM, and CANDOR, CASTOR, and POLLUX for RRMM. Large language models extracted clinical evidence, and SynIPD was generated, incorporating cytogenetic profiles. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, and results were compared with pooled analyses using synthetic data. Results: Synthetic data were generated for three studies for NDMM (ALCYONE, CASSIOPEIA, MAIA) and three studies for RRMM (CANDOR, CASTOR, POLLUX). The generated hazard ratios (HRs) for each study closely aligned with reported HRs for high-risk patients, with a maximum relative error of less than 2%. By pooling these datasets, we obtained synthetic datasets for NDMM and RRMM patients. Stratified Cox regression analyses yielded HRs (95% confidence interval) of 0.764 (0.529-1.104) for NDMM and 0.431 (0.294-0.613) for RRMM. Random-effects meta-analyses showed HRs (95% confidence interval) of 0.764 (0.529-1.104) for NDMM and 0.425 (0.287-0.621) for RRMM. Compared with traditional meta-analysis techniques, the synthetic data approach provides additional clinical insights that were not available in the original publications. For instance, the clinical results for the three NDMM studies are summarized as KM curves in Figure 1, which were not reported in the original studies. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the addition of daratumumab to standard regimens improves PFS for RRMM patients with high-risk cytogenetic factors, although its benefit for NDMM patients is not statistically significant. Pooling synthetic data enhances the robustness of conventional meta-analysis outcomes. The identification of HRs and corresponding confidence intervals through SynIPD improves the credibility of our proposed method, offering a reliable approach to evaluating the efficacy of daratumumab in high-risk patients. Since SynIPD includes individual covariate information, it provides deep clinical insights beyond merely enhancing meta-analysis. In other words, any statistical results derived from the original IPD can be effectively approximated using SynIPD.