MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2404824632 · doi:10.1182/blood.v124.21.4457.4457

Updated Results of a Phase II Randomized Study (ROMULUS) of Polatuzumab Vedotin or Pinatuzumab Vedotin Plus Rituximab in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

2014· article· en· W2404824632 sur OpenAlexaff
Franck Morschhauser, Ian W. Flinn, Ranjana H. Advani, Catherine Diefenbach, Kathryn S. Kolibaba, Oliver W. Press, Laurie H. Sehn, Andy I. Chen, Gilles Salles, Hervé Tilly, Bruce D. Cheson, Sarit Assouline, Martin Dreyling, Anton Hagenbeek, Pier Luigi Zinzani, Sreeni Yalamanchili, Dan Lü, Cheryl Jones, Surai Jones, Yu‐Waye Chu, Jeff P. Sharman

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensJewish General HospitalMcGill UniversitySpinal Cord Injury BC
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternal medicineBrentuximab vedotinCohortRituximabRefractory (planetary science)GastroenterologyFollicular lymphomaLymphomaOncologyHodgkin lymphoma

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Previously reported results from an ongoing study of polatuzumab vedotin (PoV) and pinatuzumab vedotin (PiV), antibody drug conjugates (ADC) containing the anti-mitotic MMAE targeting CD79b (PoV) and CD22 (PiV), showed clinical activity in combination with rituximab (R) in relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL). Here we report updated results of ADC + R at the RP2D of 2.4 mg/kg and initial results of PoV + R in r/r FL at the PoV dose of 1.8 mg/kg. Methods: Pts were randomized to receive PoV or PiV + R (ADC 2.4 mg/kg + R 375 mg/m2). In a separate non-randomized cohort (Cohort C), r/r FL pts were treated with PoV (1.8 mg/kg) + R. ADC + R was given every 21 days. Tumor assessments were performed every 3 months. Results: As of 21 February 2014, 59 pts received PoV + R (39 DLBCL; 20 FL), 63 PiV + R (42 DLBCL; 21 FL); 20 r/r FL pts were treated in Cohort C. Median time of follow-up was 10 mo. for PoV + R, 9 mo. for PiV + R, and 5 mo. for Cohort C. Median prior therapies [DLBCL, 3 (1-10); FL, 2 (1-8)] were balanced among the randomized treatment (tx) arms, median prior therapies in Cohort C was 2 (1-13); overall 44% were R refractory. Median tx cycles in DLBCL: 6 PoV (range 1-16) and 7 PiV (1-15); FL: 10 PoV (3-17), 7 PiV (1-14), and 6 Cohort C (2-10). Overall safety profiles of both regimens in the randomized arms receiving 2.4 mg/kg ADC were similar. The most common tx-emergent adverse events (AE) ≥25%: fatigue (55%), diarrhea (43%), nausea (37%), peripheral neuropathy (PN) (39%), neutropenia (27%), constipation (26%), sensory PN (25%), and decreased appetite (25%). Grade ≥ 3 AE >3%: neutropenia (24%), diarrhea (6%), dyspnea (5%), febrile neutropenia (4%), hyperglycemia (4%), fatigue (3%), and thrombocytopenia (3%). Serious AEs were reported in 43% and 36% of PiV and PoV treated pts, respectively. Discontinuation of study treatment for AE was reported in 49% and 41% of PiV and PoV treated pts, respectively. Thirty-five pts discontinued treatment due to PN with a median time to discontinuation of 5.6 mo. PN reversibility was observed following treatment interruptions and ADC dose modifications. Two of 9 Grade 5 AEs (sepsis, urosepsis) were attributed to CD22 ADC; no Grade 5 AEs were attributed to CD79b ADC. In Cohort C the most common tx-emergent AE ≥ 25%: fatigue (55%), nausea (45%), neutropenia (40%), sensory PN (30%), diarrhea (25%), constipation (25%) and pyrexia (25%). Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was reported in 7 pts; no other Grade ≥ 3 AE was reported in >1 pt. Serious AE were reported in 5 pts. Two pts discontinued study treatment for AE. No Grade 5 AEs were reported. Overall response rate (ORR), complete (CR) and partial (PR) response rates, n (%) [95% CI], and median PFS in DLBCL (95% CI) are shown in the table. Median PFS in the FL cohorts are not reported due to insufficient follow-up duration. Table PoV (CD79b) + R PiV (CD22) + R PoV [1.8 mg/kg] + R (Cohort C) R/R DLBCL ORR CR PR mPFS (mo.) N=39 22 (56%) [41, 71] 6 (15%) [7, 30] 16 (41%) [26, 58] 5.4 (2.8-8.4) N=42 24 (57%) [41, 72] 10 (24%) [12, 39] 14 (33%) [20, 48] 5.2 (4.1-NR) N/A R/R FL ORR CR PR N=20 14 (70%) [47, 86] 8 (40%) [21, 64] 6 (30%) [14, 53] N=21 13 (62%) [40, 80] 2 (10%) [2, 30] 11 (52%) [30, 72] N=16 7 (44%) [20, 70] 0 7 (44%) [20, 70] Pharmacokinetic profiles were similar for both ADCs across DLBCL and FL with no free MMAE accumulation. Pts receiving PoV at 1.8 mg/kg had proportionately lower exposure of antibody conjugated MMAE compared to pts treated at the 2.4 mg/kg dose level. Conclusions: PoV and PiV + R were generally well-tolerated with similar toxicity profiles. Neutropenia, PN, and diarrhea were the principal toxicities. Similar efficacy was observed with both ADCs in heavily pretreated pts with DLBCL. The higher CR rate with PoV + R compared to PiV + R suggests greater clinical activity in r/r FL. Lower overall response rates were observed in r/r FL pts treated with a lower dose of PoV. Results based on longer follow-up to further assess differences in safety and tolerability between the two PoV doses in r/r FL will be presented. Additional data of pts who received crossover ADC + R treatment following documented disease progression on initial ADC + R treatment will also be presented. Combination studies of PoV + R with chemotherapy and with ADC schedules to reduce PN are ongoing or in planning. Disclosures Morschhauser: Genentech/roche: Honoraria, travel grants Other; Celgene: advisory boards, advisory boards Other, Honoraria. Off Label Use: obinutuzumab and lenlidomide in relapsed follicular lymphoma. Flinn:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Advani:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Diefenbach:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Press:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Chen:Genentech, inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salles:Genentech, inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Tilly:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Cheson:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Assouline:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hagenbeek:millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zinzani:Genentech, inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yalamanchili:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Lu:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Jones:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Jones:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Chu:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Sharman:Gen: Research Funding.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,019

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,252
Écart entre enseignants0,245 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
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

Citations34
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207