Pralatrexate Is An Effective Treatment for Heavily Pretreated Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Transformed Mycosis Fungoides (tMF)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Abstract 1762 Background: Cutaneous T-cell lymphoma, which includes mycosis fungoides (MF) and the Sézary Syndrome, is an indolent T-cell lymphoma. Large-cell transformation (tMF) is a well-defined histopathological disease that is distinguished from primarily cutaneous MF by the presence of large cells that exceed 25% of total lymphoid infiltrate (Barberio et al. Br J Dermatol 2007; 157:284-9) and occurs in 11% to 23% of cases. tMF represents a significantly poorer prognostic subset of MF patients with median overall survival of 12 to 22 months from the time of diagnosis of large-cell transformation (Arulogun et al. Blood 2008; 112:3082-7). There is no standard therapy for tMF and most patients are treated with multiagent systemic chemotherapy regimens. Because of its poor outcome similar to that of aggressive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), tMF patients were included in PROPEL, the pivotal study that led to the accelerated approval of pralatrexate (FOLOTYN®) in the United States for the treatment of relapsed or refractory PTCL. Methods: Of 109 evaluable patients in the PROPEL trial, 12 patients had histologically confirmed tMF. All patients received pralatrexate at a dose of 30 mg/m2 weekly for 6 weeks in a 7 week cycle. Results: Of the 12 patients with tMF, the median age was 56.5 years. The median number of prior therapies was 6.5 (range 1 to 12), and 5 patients (42%) received ≥5 prior systemic regimens. The majority of patients had received prior multiagent chemotherapy, including cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine/prednisone (CHOP) or CHOP-based therapy in 67% of patients and other multiagent regimens in 17% of patients. Only 1 of 12 patients had a response to their most recent prior chemotherapy regimen. The objective response rate (ORR) to pralatrexate in this group of refractory tMF using International Workshop Criteria based on investigator assessment, was 58%. Consistent with the overall study population, the ORR by independent central review was 25%. The difference in ORR between independent central review and investigator assessment for tMF is mainly due to challenges with photodocumentation of response assessment of cutaneous lesions. The 12 patients with tMF received a median of 10 doses of pralatrexate and remained on treatment for a median of 89 days. The median response duration was 4.4 months and median PFS was 5.3 months, per investigator assessment. The median survival in this group of patients was 13 months. Mucosal inflammation was reported in 7 patients (58%) including 1 patient with grade 3. Grade 4 adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (1 patient) and thrombocytopenia (1 patient). Overall, patients with tMF were able to tolerate full-dose pralatrexate treatment, with no patients discontinuing due to an AE. Conclusions: Pralatrexate demonstrated significant activity in the 12 refractory tMF patients enrolled in the PROPEL trial with an investigator assessed response rate of 58%. Pralatrexate should be considered as a treatment option for patients with tMF. Disclosures: Foss: Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Speaker. Horwitz:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Pinter-Brown:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy. Goy:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pro:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Savage:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Shustov:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Zain:Allos Therapeutics, Inc. : Speakers Bureau. Koutsoukos:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment. Fruchtman:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment. O'Connor:Allos Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».