MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2582171842 · doi:10.1182/blood.v126.23.737.737

Defibrotide for the Treatment of Hepatic Veno-Occlusive Disease/Sinusoidal Obstruction Syndrome with Multi-Organ Dysfunction: Final Results from a Pivotal, Historically Controlled, Phase 3 Trial

2015· article· en· W2582171842 sur OpenAlexaff
Paul G. Richardson, Marcie Riches, Nancy A. Kernan, Joel A. Brochstein, Shin Mineishi, Amanda Termuhlen, Sally Arai, Stephan A. Grupp, Eva C. Guinan, Paul Martin, Gideon Steinbach, Amrita Krishnan, Eneida R. Nemecek, Sergio Giralt, Tulio E. Rodriguez, Reggie Duerst, John Doyle, Joseph H. Antin, Angela R. Smith, Leslie Lehmann, Richard E. Champlin, Alfred P. Gillio, Rajinder Bajwa, Ralph B. D’Agostino, Joseph M. Massaro, Maja Miloslavsky, Robin Hume, Massimo Iacobelli, Bijan Nejadnik, Alison L. Hannah, Robert J. Soiffer

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Établissements canadiensUniversity of ManitobaCancerCare Manitoba
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDefibrotideHepatic veno-occlusive diseaseMedicineInternal medicineAscitesCreatinineOrgan dysfunctionGastroenterologyDialysisHematopoietic stem cell transplantationHepatorenal syndromeTransplantationSurgerySepsis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Hepatic veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (VOD/SOS), is a rare and potentially life-threatening complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Severe cases, historically defined by multi-organ dysfunction (MOD), may be associated with mortality rates of >80%. There is no FDA-approved treatment for VOD/SOS. Defibrotide (DF) has a proposed mechanism of action that includes stabilization of endothelial cells and restoration of thrombo-fibrinolytic balance. Earlier analyses of a pivotal phase 3 trial of DF in VOD/SOS plus MOD (Richardson et al. Blood. 2009;114:Abstract 654) underpinned approval of DF in the EU to treat severe hepatic VOD/SOS after HSCT. Additional data were obtained at the request of US health authorities. Here we present the final analysis: day +100 survival (primary endpoint) and complete response (CR; secondary). Methods This was a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 historical control (HC) study assessing DF. Eligible patients met Baltimore VOD/SOS criteria (total bilirubin ≥2.0 mg/dL with ≥2 of: hepatomegaly, ascites, or 5% weight gain) by day +21 post-HSCT, plus MOD (renal [trebling of creatinine levels, reduced creatinine clearance, or dialysis] and/or pulmonary [oxygen saturation ≤90%, need for oxygen supplementation/ventilator dependence]) by day +28 post-HSCT. Exclusion criteria included severe graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) of liver or gut, clinically significant bleeding, or need for ≥2 pressors. HC patients were reviewed for inclusion/exclusion criteria in a sequential review of medical charts starting 6 months prior to use of DF at each site; a blinded medical review committee made the final determination of HCs unequivocally meeting criteria for VOD/SOS with MOD. DF dose was 25 mg/kg/d in 4 divided 2-hour IV infusions q6h; recommended treatment duration was ≥21 days. Primary endpoint was day +100 survival. CR by day +100 was a secondary endpoint. Treatment difference in survival and CR rates and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated using propensity-stratified and weighted (Koch-adjusted) estimates of differences in proportions that account for baseline prognostic factors of survival (ie, ventilator and/or dialysis dependency at entry, age ≤/>16 years, transplant type, and prior HSCT). Analyses included patients treated with DF and HCs. Results There were 102 patients in the DF group and 32 cases selected as HCs. Baseline characteristics were similar in the DF and HC groups: mean age (26 and 25 years; 43% and 44% ≤16 years), allogeneic graft (88% and 84%), prior HSCT (13% and 9%), ventilator- and/or dialysis-dependent at study entry (33% and 22%), myeloablative conditioning (87% and 94%), and the most common underlying diseases (acute leukemias: 45% and 47%), respectively. In the DF-treated group, common GvHD medications included tacrolimus (49%), methotrexate (41%), and cyclosporine (38%); in the HC group, common medications were cyclosporine (72%) and methotrexate (63%). Survival at day +100 in the DF and HC groups was 38% and 25%, respectively. The propensity-stratified difference in survival was 23.0% (95.1% CI, 5.2-40.8, P = .0109). Respective observed CR rates by day +100 were 25.5% and 12.5%, and the propensity-stratified difference in CR was 19.0% (95.1% CI, 3.5-34.6, P = .0160). Comparing the earlier EU and final analyses, the survival rates at day +100 in each group did not vary; however, the propensity adjusted final analysis provided a different level of statistical significance. Day +100 CR rates in the original analysis were slightly lower in both arms at 24% and 9% due to increased data capture to investigate CR; the P value was essentially unchanged. For the DF group, 45% had an adverse event (AE) at least possibly related to study drug, and 21% had a serious AE at least possibly related to study drug. In this very sick population, percentages of patients with ≥1 AE leading to death were similar between DF and HC patients (64% and 69%), as were hemorrhagic AEs (64%, 75%) and hypotension (39%, 50%). Conclusions Based on observed study data and using a propensity-adjusted rate difference estimator, patients treated with DF had a 23% reduction in risk of death by day +100 and 19% improvement in CR rate. Overall incidence of hemorrhage and fatal AEs were similar between groups with AEs consistent with those expected in this critically ill population. Support: Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Disclosures Richardson: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Marizomib, pmalidomide, and low dose dexamethasone in RR MM. Defibrotide is an investigational treatment for hepatic veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in the United States. . Kernan:Gentium S.p.A.: Research Funding. Grupp:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Guinan:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: My institution received fees for research.. Martin:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Steinbach:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Krishnan:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy; Millenium: Speakers Bureau. Giralt:SANOFI: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CELGENE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Consultancy, Research Funding; JAZZ: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TAKEDA: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Rodriguez:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Doyle:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Antin:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. D'Agostino:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Massaro:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Miloslavsky:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hume:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Iacobelli:Gentium SpA: Employment. Nejadnik:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hannah:Gentium SpA: Other: Personal fees during conduct of the study.. Soiffer:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

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)0,001
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 seuil0,022

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,001
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 recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

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 Opus0,049
Tête enseignante GPT0,284
Écart entre enseignants0,234 · 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

Citations1
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationTravaux en français237 207