MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2549385334 · doi:10.1182/blood.v118.21.4981.4981

Rituximab Resistant Follicular Lymphoma: Predictors of Rituximab Resistance, Incidence of Transformation and Prognosis

2011· article· en· W2549385334 sur OpenAlexaff
Lee Mozessohn, Matthew C. Cheung, Michael Crump, Rena Buckstein, Neil L. Berinstein, Kevin Imrie, John Kuruvilla, Eugenia Piliotis, Vishal Kukreti

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRituximabMedicineFollicular lymphomaInternal medicineMaintenance therapyOncologyLymphomaSurgeryGastroenterologyChemotherapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 4981 Follicular lymphoma (FL) is an indolent lymphoma characterized by slow growth, initial response to treatment with inevitable relapse. Recent trials have demonstrated improved progression free survival (PFS) with rituximab-containing induction, maintenance rituximab (MR) or both. However, a small subset of patients (pts) will show disease progression during the induction or maintenance phase. We evaluated rituximab resistance (RR) including incidence, predictors, rate of transformation and prognosis for pts demonstrating RR. We defined RR as disease progression during induction, maintenance or within 6 months of last dose of rituximab. We retrospectively identified pts who received rituximab for symptomatic FL from July 2006 to April 2010 at 2 regional cancer centres. Those with a diagnosis of FL grades 1, 2 or 3a with first exposure to rituximab (induction, maintenance or both) were included. Exclusion criteria included FL grade 3b and previous rituximab exposure. Progression was ascertained from clinical notes or radiological investigation as per IWG Criteria (1999). Transformation was defined by confirmatory biopsy and clinical suspicion of transformation was also recorded (nodal growth, rapid rise in LDH or new B symptoms). PFS and overall survival (OS) were measured from initiation of rituximab induction. Log-rank statistics were used to identify univariate predictors for RR and Cox regression for multivariate analysis with outcome as time to early progression (RR). Of the pts screened, 132 met inclusion criteria (112 pts receiving primary therapy, 20 for ≥ 2nd line therapy); 22 pts (16.7%) demonstrated RR. Incidence of RR was similar for pts receiving primary therapy (17.0%). Pt characteristics for rituximab sensitive (RS) and RR groups are shown in Table 1. From induction, median follow-up was 33 months (range 9 to 61 months). In univariate analysis, high risk FLIPI score at induction was predictive of RR (p = 0.002). Partial response to induction (p = 0.082) trended to significance. Other factors not predictive of RR included: age, gender, high grade histology (grade 3a), previous chemotherapy received, time from diagnosis to induction therapy and anthracycline-based induction. A Cox regression model was constructed with FLIPI score and anthracycline-based induction as covariates. FLIPI score was independently and significantly predictive of RR (HR 2.43; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.1; p = 0.001). Of the 22 pts who were RR, 18 (81.8%) required subsequent chemotherapy with only 9 achieving at least a partial response. Ten pts (45.5%) required more than 1 line of chemotherapy post-progression with a median time to next line of therapy of 9 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 15.1; see figure). Among the RR pts, 5 (22.7%) showed evidence of transformation on biopsy at initial resistance and an additional 3 (13.6%) were clinically suspected. Within 12 months of resistance, a further 3 pts in the RR group demonstrated biopsy-proven transformation. Overall, 10 pts (45.5%) transformed (biopsy-proven) with no transformation in the RS group. During follow-up, 9 deaths occurred, all in those with RR, 5 following biopsy-proven transformation. The median PFS and OS in the RR group were 17 months and 47 months, respectively. Table 1 Characteristics RS (n = 110) RR (n = 22) Age (MEAN) 58.9 58.9 Gender (females) 43.6% 40.9% High histological grade (3a) 8.4% 9.1% Previous treatment (yes) 15.5% 13.6% Alkylator 11.8% 13.6% Number of lines of previous treatment >1 4.5% 4.5% Mean time from diagnosis to induction (months) 30.3 28.1 Induction chemo R-CVP based 78.2% 86.4% R-CHOP based 18.2% 9.1% Other 3.6% 4.5% Response to induction PR 77.3% 72.7% CRu 12.7% 0% CR 10.0% 4.5% SD/PD 0% 22.7% FLIPI score at induction Low (0, 1, 2) 57.8% 18.2% Intermediate (3) 26.6% 40.9% High (4 or 5) 15.6% 40.9% Stage 3 or 4 88.2% 100% High tumor burden at diagnosis (GELF criteria) 43.6% 40.9% We demonstrated that the incidence of rituximab resistance in FL on first exposure to rituximab in our population was 16.7%. FLIPI score was predictive for RR and was independent of anthracycline-based induction regimens. Pts with RR had a high rate of histologic transformation (36.3% within 12 months post RR) and a shorter PFS/OS with a poor response to next therapy. Biopsies to confirm transformation should be performed in all pts demonstrating RR, and new therapies are needed for this group of pts. Disclosures: Crump: Ortho Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria.

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)0,001
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: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,005

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
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)0,0010,000

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 Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,216
Écart entre enseignants0,204 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations4
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→Travaux en français237 207→