MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2546853358 · doi:10.1182/blood.v114.22.790.790

Preliminary Results of Southwest Oncology Group Study S0106: An International Intergroup Phase 3 Randomized Trial Comparing the Addition of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin to Standard Induction Therapy Versus Standard Induction Therapy Followed by a Second Randomization to Post-Consolidation Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin Versus No Additional Therapy for Previously Untreated Acute Myeloid Leukemia.

2009· article· en· W2546853358 sur OpenAlexaff
Stephen H. Petersdorf, Kenneth J. Kopecky, Robert K. Stuart, Richard A. Larson, Thomas J. Nevill, Leif Stenke, Marilyn L. Slovak, Martin S. Tallman, Cheryl L. Willman, Harry P. Erba, Frederick R. Appelbaum

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGemtuzumab ozogamicinMedicineInterim analysisCytarabineInternal medicineRandomizationInduction chemotherapyRandomized controlled trialSurgeryOncologyChemotherapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 790 Study S0106 is an open-label randomized phase III trial to evaluate the benefit and toxicity of adding Gemtuzumab ozogamicin [GO] to standard induction therapy, followed by a post-consolidation randomization to receive either 3 additional doses of GO or no additional therapy [OBS]. Eligible patients were adults (age 18-60) with previously untreated de novo nonM3 AML. Patients were randomized (stratified by age <35 vs 35+) to receive induction therapy with daunorubicin (45 mg/m2 D1,2,3) and cytarabine (100mg/m2/d CI D1-7) and GO (6 mg/m2 D4) [AD+GO] (DeAngelo,2003) versus standard induction therapy with daunorubicin (60 mg/m2 IV D1,2,3) and cytarabine (100mg/m2/d CI D1-7) [AD]. Patients in either arm who failed to achieve aplasia at D14 were retreated with AD. Patients achieving CR received consolidation therapy with 3 courses of high dose cytarabine (3 gm/m2/q12h D1,3,5 every 28 days). Patients remaining in CR after consolidation were eligible for a second randomization (stratified by cytogenetic risk category at diagnosis and use of GO during induction) between 3 doses of GO (5 mg/m2 every 28 days) or OBS. 627 patients were registered on study S0106 from May 15, 2004 though July 23, 2009, the cutoff for the second interim analysis of induction outcomes (which by protocol plan was based on the first 456 eligible patients) and first planned interim analysis of disease-free survival measured from the post-consolidation randomization [DFS] (based on the first 64 relapses or deaths). Complete response [CR] rates were 150/277=66% (AD+GO) and 159/229=69% (AD), ruling out the originally hypothesized 12% increase with AD+GO at the prespecified significance level (P<0.0025). Including CRs with incomplete hematologic recovery, the response rates were 74% in both arms. Importantly, relapse-free survival measured from the date of CR [RFS] was not significantly better in the AD+GO arm (hazard ratio [HR]=1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.44, P=0.50), unlike preliminary results of the MRC AML15 trial (Burnett, Blood 2006 108: Abstract 13). Among all patients evaluable for induction toxicity, the rate of fatal adverse events [AEs] at least possibly attributable to treatment (most commonly hemorrhage, infection and/or ARDS) was significantly higher in the AD+GO arm (15/260=5.8% vs 2/255=0.8%, P=0.002). One death in the AD+GO arm was attributable to sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS). Notably, the AE rate in the AD+GO arm is similar to previous SWOG AML trials, while the rate in the AD arm is remarkably low (CI 0.1-2.8%). The first planned interim analysis of post-consolidation therapy evaluated 150 patients randomized between GO and OBS, only 7 of whom had unfavorable cytogenetics. 36 GO and 25 OBS patients have relapsed, and one GO and 2 OBS patients have died without report of relapse. DFS was not significantly better in the GO arm (HR=0.66 for OBS compared to GO, CI 0.40-1.08, one-sided P=0.95); moreover the hypothesized benefit of GO (HR=1.5) was rejected at the prespecified significance level (P<0.001). Based on these results – the lack of improvement in CR rate or RFS and the higher fatal induction AE rate on the AD+GO induction arm, and the lack of improvement in DFS on the post-consolidation GO arm – the SWOG DSMC on August 11, 2009 recommended closure of both the induction and post-consolidation randomizations. Among all eligible patients with any follow-up, the estimated median overall survival from study entry was 31 months with AD+GO induction (CI 22-39 months) and 35 months with AD (CI 24-41 months). In this study, the addition of GO to induction therapy or as post-consolidation therapy did not improve the CR rate, RFS, post-consolidation DFS, or overall survival, but was associated with a significantly higher risk of fatal induction adverse events. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
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 enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,032

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
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 recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0070,001

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 Opus0,031
Tête enseignante GPT0,347
Écart entre enseignants0,316 · 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

Citations183
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchTravaux en français237 207