Evidence Hub

Results of a Double-Blind Prospective Comparative Randomized Phase 3 Clinical Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of BCD-264 and Darzalex as Monotherapy for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (BCD-264-2/DARVIVA)

T. V. Shelekhova, J. Kumar, S. Apte, Iurii Osipov, E. Misyurina, V. Doronin, T. Konstantinova, B. Bakirov et al.

Clinical oncohematology, 2026

1 citation

Abstract

AIM. To confirm the comparability of the biosimilar daratumumab BCD-264 (BIOCAD) with the reference drug Darzalex (Johnson & Johnson) in terms of efficacy and safety of the monotherapy for relapsed/refractory (r/r) multiple myeloma (MM).

MATERIALS & METHODS. This paper is based on the double-blind prospective comparative randomized phase 3 clinical trial BCD-264-2/DARVIVA assessing the efficacy and safety of BCD-264 and Darzalex as monotherapy for r/r MM. Duration of the blind period was 24 weeks. The trial enrolled 252 r/r MM patients treated with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs. This paper documents the analysis of the data collected within the blind period when the therapy was administered to Group 1 and Group 2, whereby neither the investigators nor the patients knew which drug is being used in each of the groups.

RESULTS. The primary end point of the study was overall response rate (ORR) in 24 weeks after therapy onset. In Group 1, ORR was 36.2 % and it was 32.0 % in Group 2; ORR ratio for Group 1/2 was 1.13 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.80–1.60) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.63–1.24) for Group 2/1. This confirmed the hypothesis of BCD-264 being no less effective than Darzalex. Besides, an additional hypothesis of drug equivalence was proved true demonstrating also the comparability of the drugs across all secondary efficacy end points and safety parameters. The most common adverse events reported in both groups were leukopenia, neutropenia, lymphopenia,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free