Abstract 5303: Correlative results from PRELUDE, a phase III study of enzastaurin (ENZA) vs placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) following a response to R-CHOP therapy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Protein kinase Cβ (PKCβ) is critical for B-cell signaling and survival and overexpression of PKCβ in DLBCL is associated with inferior survival. ENZA, an oral serine/threonine kinase inhibitor, targets PKCβ. Here we report immunohistochemical (IHC) and fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) correlative analyses. Methods: PRELUDE (NCT00332202) was a phase III, double-blind maintenance study of 758 pts with DLBCL who were randomized 2:1 to ENZA 500 mg daily (1125-mg loading dose) (n = 504) or PBO (n = 254), respectively, following CR to induction therapy with R-CHOP. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). Overall survival (OS) and assessment of biomarkers specific to ENZA and DLBCL were secondary endpoints. Pre-treatment formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples were assessed via IHC staining in a blinded manner (Eric Hsi) for cell of origin (COO) using Hans’ algorithm. In addition, IHC was performed for c-MYC, BCL2, BCL6, FOXP1, and MUM1 (10% increments/% tumor cells stained), markers relevant to ENZA, including PKCβ2. FISH was performed to identify translocations involving c-MYC, BCL2, and BCL6. Cox regression was used to determine statistical associations between efficacy outcomes and dichotomized markers, adjusting for treatment and additional baseline covariates. All tests of association were conducted at a 2-sided α = 0.05. Results: There was no difference in 4-year DFS (70% vs 71%) or OS (81% vs 82%) between ENZA and PBO arms, respectively. A total of 243 (32%) pts had ≥1 evaluable sample available for IHC and FISH. There was no difference in outcome for pts based on COO (GCB vs non-GCB). Independent of treatment, significant associations were observed for BCL2 (pre-specified cutpoint 20%) and MUM1 (cutpoint 30%) with OS, and FOXP1 (cutpoint 80%) by IHC with DFS (HR [95% CI]: 2.19 [1.01-4.73]), p = 0.031; 1.97 [1.04-3.71], p = 0.032; 1.74 [1.04-2.90], p = 0.032, respectively). Associations were not significant for other IHC markers, including c-MYC and BCL6. Low PKCβ2 (<50% expression) had numerically better (but not significant) DFS/OS vs high PKCβ2. Dual translocation lymphoma by FISH was identified in two pts (1.2%) each for c-MYC/BCL2 and c-MYC/BCL6, and one pt (0.6%) had a triple hit involving c-MYC/BCL2/BCL6. Conclusions: No difference in outcomes between treatment arms was observed for the trial. Independent of treatment, COO was not prognostic of outcomes. Pts with low PKCβ2 expression had numerically better DFS/OS compared with high PKCβ2 expression. Significant treatment-independent associations were observed for BCL2 and MUM1 with OS and for FOXP1 with DFS (low IHC expression corresponded to better outcomes). The small number of double hit and triple hit lymphomas seen in the study may reflect the enrollment of CR patients with more favorable biology. Citation Format: Eric D. Hsi, Kerry J. Savage, Sonali M. Smith, Fritz Offner, Scott P. Myrand, Thomas M. Habermann, Donald E. Thornton, Boris K. Lin, Tuan S. Nguyen, Oday Hamid, Michael Crump. Correlative results from PRELUDE, a phase III study of enzastaurin (ENZA) vs placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) following a response to R-CHOP therapy. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 5303. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-5303
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».