MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1790270491 · doi:10.1182/blood.v122.21.4345.4345

Gemcitabine, Dexamethasone, and Cisplatin (GDP) As Secondary Chemotherapy In Relapsed/Refractory Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma

2013· article· en· W1790270491 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen Parkin, Joseph M. Connors, Laurie H. Sehn, Diego Villa, Richard Klasa, Alina S. Gerrie, Randy D. Gascoyne, Tamara Shenkier, Cynthia L. Toze, John D. Shepherd, Kevin Song, Kerry J. Savage

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineImmunology and Microbiology
ThématiqueT-cell and Retrovirus Studies
Établissements canadiensVancouver General HospitalLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of CanadaBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternal medicineGemcitabineOncologyChemotherapy regimenRegimenSalvage therapyPopulationChemotherapyGastroenterologySurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The only known curative option for relapsed/refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) is secondary chemotherapy followed by high dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplant (HDC/SCT), if chemosensitivity is demonstrated. The optimal choice of regimen in this setting, as well as in the transplant ineligible population is unknown. Gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin (GDP) was developed as an alternative to DHAP with a favorable side effect profile and administration in the outpatient setting. Since 2002, it has been used as the preferred second-line regimen in patients (pts) with relapsed aggressive lymphoma at the BC Cancer Agency (BCCA), including those with PTCL intended for treatment with HDC/SCT, as well as for selected pts treated with palliative intent. Patients and Methods The BCCA Lymphoid Cancer database, provincial cancer pharmacy database, and the Leukemia/BMT Program of BC database were screened to identify all pts who received GDP for relapsed/refractory PTCL, excluding cutaneous ALCL. Clinical factors and whether transplant was planned at the time of relapse/progression were collected. Disease refractory to primary therapy was defined as progressive disease (PD) during primary treatment or relapse within 3 months (m) of treatment completion. All endpoints were calculated from the date of the first cycle of GDP unless stated otherwise. Results 51 pts were identified between 2002 and 2012 with either relapsed (n=31, 61%) or primary refractory (n=20, 39%) PTCL with the following histologic subtypes: PTCL-NOS, n=17 (33%); ALCL, n=16 (31%) [ALK-positive, n=4 (8%); ALK-negative, ALCL n=10 (20%); ALK status unknown, n=2 (4%)]; AILT, n=13 (25%); NK/T cell nasal type, n=4 (8%); hepatosplenic, n=1 (2%); subcutaneous panniculitis-like, n=2 (4%). First-line treatment consisted of a CHOP-like regimen in the majority of pts (n=48) and one patient with NK/TCL received SMILE. Two pts with NK/TCL received radiation alone. The median time to progression or relapse after initial diagnosis was 7.4 m (range 0.8-150.2). At relapse, the median age was 56 years (y) (range 17-86), 43% had an elevated LDH and most had advanced stage disease (stage III/IV, 88%), good performance status (PS 0-1, 69%) and a high or high-intermediate secondary IPI (sIPI >3, 57%). Pts received an average of 3 cycles of GDP (range 1-6). In total, 36 pts (71%) were planned for HDC/SCT, based on age and lack of significant comorbidities, following a response to GDP. Those planned for transplant were more likely to be younger (< 60 y) (p=.050) with a good PS (0-1) at relapse (p=0.049) but had a similar sIPI risk distribution (p=0.195). Of these, 26 ultimately underwent HDC/SCT (transplant rate 72%; auto, n=15; allo, n=11 [non-myeloablative n=2]). Pts who underwent alloSCT (vs autoSCT) were more likely to have disease that was refractory to primary therapy (p=.045). Of the 10 pts planned for SCT who did not undergo transplant, 8 were due to PD, 1 did not have a matched sibling donor, and 1 refused transplant. The overall response rate (ORR) to GDP for all 51 pts was 80% (CR 47%) and with a median follow-up of 10.4 m for living pts, the 2 y progression free survival (PFS) following GDP was 25% and the 2 y overall survival (OS) was 43% with no differences amongst the histologic subtypes. For pts planned for transplant, the ORR was 83% (CR 58%). The 2 y PFS and OS for this group intended for transplant were 30% and 50%, respectively, and those with relapsed disease (n=22) had a superior outcome to those with primary refractory disease (n=14) (2 y PFS 42.5% vs 9%, p=.0027). The 2 y post-transplant OS was 53% and there was no difference observed between the relapsed and refractory pts who were ultimately transplanted (p=.23). For all non-transplanted pts (n=25), the median PFS after GDP was 4.4 m and the median OS was 6.8 m. In responding pts, the median duration of response was 6.8 m. The small group of non-transplanted pts with a good PS (0-1) at the time of GDP, had an improved PFS (7.9 m vs 1.6 m, p=.044) and median OS (3.7 y vs 4.2 m) following GDP with 3 pts alive and without PD. Overall, GDP was well tolerated with no treatment related deaths. Conclusion Our results suggest that GDP is an effective secondary therapy for relapsed PTCL and can lead to long-term survival, especially in those pts who subsequently undergo HDC/SCT. Selected pts with good PS may have durable remissions in the palliative setting. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Off label use of gemcitabine in the treatment of PTCLs. Connors:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Roche Canada: Research Funding. Savage:Eli-Lilly: Consultancy.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,616
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,005
Tête enseignante GPT0,196
Écart entre enseignants0,191 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetT-cell and Retrovirus StudiesTravaux en français237 207