MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2560524290 · doi:10.1182/blood.v128.22.5583.5583

Temporal Profiles of Lymphocyte Subsets and the Correlation with Infectious Events in Idelalisib-Treated Patients

2016· article· en· W2560524290 sur OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey P. Sharman, Gilles Salles, Wojciech Jurczak, Jeffrey A. Jones, Carolyn Owen, Veerendra Munugalavadla, Lyndah Dreiling, Yuanyuan Xiao, Arati V. Rao, Ian W. Flinn, Susan O’Brien

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineIdelalisibOfatumumabBendamustineInternal medicinePlaceboPopulationRituximabImmunologyChronic lymphocytic leukemiaLymphomaLeukemiaIbrutinib

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Idelalisib (IDELA) is a targeted PI3Kd inhibitor approved as monotherapy in relapsed follicular lymphoma and in combination with rituximab in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Increased rates of adverse events (AEs) were recently observed in the IDELA vs placebo arms of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating IDELA added to standard therapies in front-line CLL and early-line indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). AEs leading to death were mainly infectious and included pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) and cytomegalovirus (CMV). This analysis across trials in the relapsed population evaluated whether quantitative changes in lymphocyte subsets may have contributed to these AEs. Methods: Peripheral blood immunophenotypic data available for analysis from patients (pts) (n = 1,480) treated in 5 IDELA RCTs were analyzed. Three studies (n = 787) included pts with relapsed CLL (NCT01569295: IDELA + bendamustine-rituximab [BR] vs placebo + BR; NCT01539512: IDELA + R vs placebo + R and NCT0165902: IDELA + ofatumumab [O] vs placebo + O) and 2 studies (n = 693) included R/R iNHL pts (NCT01732913: IDELA + R vs placebo + R and NCT01732926: IDELA +BR vs placebo + BR). Absolute numbers of T (CD4+ and CD8+), B (CD19+) and NK (CD16+/CD56+) cells were analyzed longitudinally in both IDELA and placebo pts across the 5 studies. Lymphocyte subsets were analyzed separately in those who died and then correlated with specific grade ≥3 AEs including infections, febrile neutropenia, and respiratory (acute respiratory failure, pneumonitis) events. Analysis was conducted within individual study and for all studies combined. Of note, samples were collected more frequently during the first 6 months (during combination therapy) and collection times varied among the 5 studies. Results: There was no specific trend noted with the CD8+ T-cells between treatment groups across the studies. Generally, NK-cells were decreased to a similar degree in both IDELA and placebo pts at weeks 10 to 12 with recovery starting around week 24. There were no differences in median NK- and CD8+ T-cell counts between pts with grade ≥3 AEs and no AEs within either group. In both BR trials, CD4+ T-cells nadir to <200 cells/µl occurred at week 22 in both groups. Recovery of CD4 to ≥200 cells/µL occurred at week 30 in CLL pts and at week 72 in iNHL pts. Median CD4+ T-cells in pts on the BR trials were lower in groups both with and without AEs, compared with non-BR trials (Table 1). There were a total of 31 cases of PJP (13 in the BR trials) and 32 cases of CMV infection (28 in the BR trials). Analysis of PJP and CMV pts with available immunophenotypic data (n = 46) revealed that 33 pts had CD4 <200 cells/µL; 31 of these were treated with IDELA plus combination therapy (Figure 1). Finally, while there were more grade ≥3 AEs within IDELA arms, these did not occur at any specific CD4 level and, in fact, grade ≥3 AEs were noted even in pts with CD4 >900 cells/µL. Conclusion: Within 5 RCTs evaluating IDELA vs placebo in combination with an anti-CD20 mAb or BR in R/R CLL or iNHL, there was no correlation between grade ≥3 AEs and NK- or CD8+ T-cell counts. Median CD4+ T-cells in pts on the BR trials were lower in both groups in those with and without AEs, compared with non-BR trials. In addition, pts with PJP and CMV infections were noted to have CD4+ T-cells <200 cells/ µL, and this was more common in IDELA-treated patients, especially when combined with BR, suggesting that the lymphosuppressive effect of IDELA may augment the myelosuppressive effect of bendamustine. While this current study involves the quantitative analysis of various immune cell subsets, it may be the qualitative function of these cells that contributed to infections. Assays evaluating the qualitative function of these cells are being investigated. All IDELA trials have been amended to include PJP prophylaxis and CMV monitoring. Figure 1 Figure 1. Incidence of PJP and CMV Infections and Correlation with CD4 Count. Disclosures Sharman: Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Salles:Mundipharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jurczak:Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Jones:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; PCYC: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Owen:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Munugalavadla:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dreiling:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Xiao:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rao:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. O'Brien:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, 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 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 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 enseignants0,291
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,245

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)0,0000,000

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 GPT0,236
Écart entre enseignants0,229 · 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.

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

Citations3
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchTravaux en français237 207