Ga-induced atom wire formation and passivation of stepped Si(112)

We present an in-depth analysis of the atomic and electronic structure of the quasi one-dimensional (1D) surface reconstruction of Ga on Si(112) based on Scanning Tunneling Microscopy and Spectroscopy (STM and STS), Rutherford Backscattering Spectrometry (RBS) and Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations. A new structural model of the Si(112)6 x 1-Ga surface is inferred. It consists of Ga zig-zag chains that are intersected by quasi-periodic vacancy lines or misfit dislocations. The experimentally observed meandering of the vacancy lines is caused by the co-existence of competing 6 x 1 and 5 x 1 unit cells and by the orientational disorder of symmetry breaking Si-Ga dimers inside the vacancy lines. The Ga atoms are fully coordinated, and the surface is chemically passivated. STS data reveal a semiconducting surface and show excellent agreement with calculated Local Density of States (LDOS) and STS curves. The energy gain obtained by fully passivating the surface calls the idea of step-edge decoration as a viable growth method toward 1D metallic structures into question.Comment: Submitted, 13 pages, accepted in Phys. Rev. B, notational change in Fig.

Initial growth of Ba on Ge(001): An STM and DFT study

An ordered alkaline-earth submonolayer on a clean Si(001) surface provides a template for growth of the atomically sharp, crystalline Si-oxide interface that is ubiquitous in the semiconductor device industry. It has been suggested that submonolayers of Sr or Ba on Ge(001) could play a similar role as on structurally identical Si(001), overcoming known limitations of the Ge(001) substrate such as amorphization of its oxidation layers. In this paper the initial stage of the Ba oxidation process, i.e., adsorption and organization of Ba atoms on the Ge(001) surface as a function of temperature (270−770 K) for coverage 1.0 monolayer (ML) and 0.15−0.4 ML, is studied using scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and density functional theory (DFT). Three types of features have been identified on the Ba-covered Ge(001) surface. They originate from isolated Ba adatoms, isolated Ba ad-dimers, and the Ba ad-dimers assembled into short-range, randomly distributed chains that run across the Ge dimer rows. We find from both STM measurements and DFT calculations that the latter is the dominant structure on Ge(001) with increasing coverage

Higher order reconstructions of the Ge(001) surface induced by a Ba layer

Structural properties of Ba-induced reconstructions on a Ge(001) surface, based on atomic-resolution ultra high-vacuum scanning tunneling microscopy measurements, are discussed. It is shown that while the Ba - Ge layer, which fully covers the surface, is dominated by a phase with an internal 2 × 3 periodicity, it also includes portions of higher order 2 × 6 and 4 × 3 surface reconstructions, always accompanied by 1D protrusions embedded into the dominating phase. Modelling the observed higher order structures, using the elementary cell of the 2 × 3 phase calculated within the density functional theory, is shown to reproduce the experimental data very well. As such the higher order reconstructions can be treated as local defects of the dominating 2 × 3 phase

STM and DFT study on formation and characterization of Ba-incorporated phases on a Ge(001) surface

We characterize the incorporation of Ba adatoms into the Ge(001) surface, resulting in the formation of one-dimensional structures with an internal 2×3 periodicity, after the deposition of Ba atoms at 970 K or at room temperature followed by a 770 K anneal. Scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) data were compared with theoretically simulated STM images generated by density functional theory electronic structure calculations. Excellent agreement between experiment and simulation was found when using an adopted structural model that assumes partial removal of the surface Ge dimers in the [1–10] surface direction and subsequent addition of a single Ba atom to the substrate second layer. Structural assignments for a number of defects observed within regions of the 2×3 reconstruction were also obtained

Extramedullary disease in multiple myeloma: a systematic literature review

Extramedullary involvement (or extramedullary disease, EMD) represents an aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM), characterized by the ability of a clone and/or subclone to thrive and grow independent of the bone marrow microenvironment. Several different definitions of EMD have been used in the published literature. We advocate that true EMD is restricted to soft-tissue plasmacytomas that arise due to hematogenous spread and have no contact with bony structures. Typical sites of EMD vary according to the phase of MM. At diagnosis, EMD is typically found in skin and soft tissues; at relapse, typical sites involved include liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, central nervous system (CNS), breast, pleura, and pericardium. The reported incidence of EMD varies considerably, and differences in diagnostic approach between studies are likely to contribute to this variability. In patients with newly diagnosed MM, the reported incidence ranges from 0.5% to 4.8%, while in relapsed/refractory MM the reported incidence is 3.4 to 14%. Available data demonstrate that the prognosis is poor, and considerably worse than for MM without soft-tissue plasmacytomas. Among patients with plasmacytomas, those with EMD have poorer outcomes than those with paraskeletal involvement. CNS involvement is rare, but prognosis is even more dismal than for EMD in other locations, particularly if there is leptomeningeal involvement. Available data on treatment outcomes for EMD are derived almost entirely from retrospective studies. Some agents and combinations have shown a degree of efficacy but, as would be expected, this is less than in MM patients with no extramedullary involvement. The paucity of prospective studies makes it difficult to justify strong recommendations for any treatment approach. Prospective data from patients with clearly defined EMD are important for the optimal evaluation of treatment outcomes

Extramedullary disease in multiple myeloma: a systematic literature review

Extramedullary involvement (or extramedullary disease, EMD) represents an aggressive form of multiple myeloma (MM), characterized by the ability of a clone and/or subclone to thrive and grow independent of the bone marrow microenvironment. Several different definitions of EMD have been used in the published literature. We advocate that true EMD is restricted to soft-tissue plasmacytomas that arise due to hematogenous spread and have no contact with bony structures. Typical sites of EMD vary according to the phase of MM. At diagnosis, EMD is typically found in skin and soft tissues; at relapse, typical sites involved include liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, central nervous system (CNS), breast, pleura, and pericardium. The reported incidence of EMD varies considerably, and differences in diagnostic approach between studies are likely to contribute to this variability. In patients with newly diagnosed MM, the reported incidence ranges from 0.5% to 4.8%, while in relapsed/refractory MM the reported incidence is 3.4 to 14%. Available data demonstrate that the prognosis is poor, and considerably worse than for MM without soft-tissue plasmacytomas. Among patients with plasmacytomas, those with EMD have poorer outcomes than those with paraskeletal involvement. CNS involvement is rare, but prognosis is even more dismal than for EMD in other locations, particularly if there is leptomeningeal involvement. Available data on treatment outcomes for EMD are derived almost entirely from retrospective studies. Some agents and combinations have shown a degree of efficacy but, as would be expected, this is less than in MM patients with no extramedullary involvement. The paucity of prospective studies makes it difficult to justify strong recommendations for any treatment approach. Prospective data from patients with clearly defined EMD are important for the optimal evaluation of treatment outcomes

Monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS): Real-world data on outcomes and prognostic factors

Monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) is a recognized clinical entity. Literature regarding treatment and its outcomes in MGRS is sparse due to the rarity and misdiagnosis of MGRS. We retrospectively analyzed 280 adults with an MGRS diagnosis from 2003 to 2020 across 19 clinical centers from 12 countries. All cases required renal biopsy for the pathological diagnosis of MGRS. Amyloidosis-related to MGRS (MGRS-A) was present in 180 patients; nonamyloidosis MGRS (MGRS-NA), including a broad spectrum of renal pathologies, was diagnosed in 100 patients. The median overall survival in the studied cohort was 121.0 months (95% CI: 105.0–121.0). Patients with MGRS-A had a shorter overall survival than patients with MGRS-NA (HR = 0.41, 95%CI: 0.25–0.69; p = 0.0007). Both hematologic and renal responses were associated with longer survival. Achievement of ≥VGPR was generally predictive of a renal response (OR = 8.03 95%CI: 4.04–115.96; p < 0.0001), one-fourth of patients with ≥VGPR were renal nonresponders. In MGRS-A, factors associated with poor prognosis included elevated levels of creatinine, beta-2-microglobulin, and hemodialysis at diagnosis. In MGRS-NA, only age >65 years was associated with increased risk of death. Treatments provided similar hematologic response rates in both types of MGRS. Autologous stem cell transplantation led to better response than other treatments. This multicenter and international effort is currently the largest report on MGRS

Once-weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus twice-weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with multiple myeloma (BOSTON): a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial

Background Selinexor with dexamethasone has demonstrated activity in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma (MM). In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with the proteasome inhibitor (PI) bortezomib, and dexamethasone (SVd) induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly SVd versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with previously treated MM. Methods This phase 3, randomised, open label trial was conducted at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients who were previously treated with one to three lines of therapy, including PIs were randomised (1:1) to selinexor (100 mg once-weekly) plus bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 once-weekly) and dexamethasone (20 mg twice-weekly) [SVd] or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 twice-weekly) and dexamethasone (20 mg 4 times per week) [Vd]. Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous PI therapy, lines of treatment, and MM stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. Findings Between June 2017 and February 2019, 402 patients were randomised: 195 to SVd and 207 to Vd. Median PFS was 13·93 (95% CI 11·73–NE) with SVd versus 9·46 months (8·11–10·78) with Vd; HR 0·70, [95% CI 0·53–0·93]; P=0.0075. Most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events (SVd vs Vd) were thrombocytopenia (77 [40%] vs 35 [17%]), fatigue (26 [13%] vs 2 [1%]), anaemia (31 [16%] vs 20 [10%]), and pneumonia (22 [11%] vs 22 [11%]). Peripheral neuropathy rates (overall, 32·3% vs 47·1%; OR 0·52, [95% CI 0·35-0·79]; P=0.0010 and grade ≥2, 21·0% vs 34·3%; OR 0·50, [95% CI 0·32-0·79]; P=0.0013) were lower with SVd. There were 47 (24%) deaths on SVd and 62 (30%) on Vd. Interpretation Once-weekly SVd is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with MM who have received 1-3 prior therapies. Funding Karyopharm Therapeutics In

Treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma: recommendations from the International Myeloma Working Group

This Policy Review presents the International Myeloma Working Group's clinical practice recommendations for the treatment of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. Based on the results of phase 2 and phase 3 trials, these recommendations are proposed for the treatment of patients with relapsed and refractory disease who have received one previous line of therapy, and for patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who have received two or more previous lines of therapy. These recommendations integrate the issue of drug access in both low-income and middle-income countries and in high-income countries to help guide real-world practice and thus improve patient outcomes

Carfilzomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (ENDEAVOR): And randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre study

Background: Bortezomib with dexamethasone is a standard treatment option for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Carfilzomib with dexamethasone has shown promising activity in patients in this disease setting. The aim of this study was to compare the combination of carfilzomib and dexamethasone with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Methods: In this randomised, phase 3, open-label, multicentre study, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma who had one to three previous treatments were randomly assigned (1:1) using a blocked randomisation scheme (block size of four) to receive carfilzomib with dexamethasone (carfilzomib group) or bortezomib with dexamethasone (bortezomib group). Randomisation was stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, previous lines of treatment, International Staging System stage, and planned route of bortezomib administration if randomly assigned to bortezomib with dexamethasone. Patients received treatment until progression with carfilzomib (20 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1; 56 mg/m2 thereafter; 30 min intravenous infusion) and dexamethasone (20 mg oral or intravenous infusion) or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2; intravenous bolus or subcutaneous injection) and dexamethasone (20 mg oral or intravenous infusion). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. All participants who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the safety analyses. The study is ongoing but not enrolling participants; results for the interim analysis of the primary endpoint are presented. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01568866. Findings: Between June 20, 2012, and June 30, 2014, 929 patients were randomly assigned (464 to the carfilzomib group; 465 to the bortezomib group). Median follow-up was 11·9 months (IQR 9·3-16·1) in the carfilzomib group and 11·1 months (8·2-14·3) in the bortezomib group. Median progression-free survival was 18·7 months (95% CI 15·6-not estimable) in the carfilzomib group versus 9·4 months (8·4-10·4) in the bortezomib group at a preplanned interim analysis (hazard ratio [HR] 0·53 [95% CI 0·44-0·65]; p<0·0001). On-study death due to adverse events occurred in 18 (4%) of 464 patients in the carfilzomib group and in 16 (3%) of 465 patients in the bortezomib group. Serious adverse events were reported in 224 (48%) of 463 patients in the carfilzomib group and in 162 (36%) of 456 patients in the bortezomib group. The most frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events were anaemia (67 [14%] of 463 patients in the carfilzomib group vs 45 [10%] of 456 patients in the bortezomib group), hypertension (41 [9%] vs 12 [3%]), thrombocytopenia (39 [8%] vs 43 [9%]), and pneumonia (32 [7%] vs 36 [8%]). Interpretation: For patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, carfilzomib with dexamethasone could be considered in cases in which bortezomib with dexamethasone is a potential treatment option. Funding: Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Inc., an Amgen subsidiary