MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2592055730 · doi:10.1182/blood.v116.21.3094.3094

A Retrospective Study on the Incidence of Rituximab-Related Interstitial Pneumonitis In Patients Undergoing Immunochemotherapy for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

2010· article· en· W2592055730 sur OpenAlexaff
Giselle Salmasi, Michael Li, Vithika Sivabalasundaram, Richard Tsang, Vishal Kukreti, Michael Crump, John Kuruvilla

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRituximabMedicineOfatumumabInternal medicineVincristineLymphomaIncidence (geometry)CHOPRetrospective cohort studyCD20ConcomitantDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaSurgeryCyclophosphamideChemotherapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3094 Background: Rituximab is a chimeric monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody that is standard of care for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Recent small retrospective case series have highlighted interstitial pneumonitis (IP) as a rare but potentially fatal side effect of rituximab but the incidence of pneumotoxicity in the product monograph is reported to be < 0.03%. In clinical practice, it can be difficult to ascertain the cause of IP given that rituximab, cyclophosphamide and G-CSF are all potentially causative agents and infection is an important concern. The primary purpose of this study was to quantify the incidence of rituximab-related IP in patients receiving immunochemotherapy for NHL. Methods: All patients with NHL who received CHOP, CVP, R-CHOP, or R-CVP in Princess Margaret Hospital between January 1, 1999 and August 30, 2009 were retrospectively reviewed with case ascertainment from a pharmacy database as well as a prospectively populated lymphoma database. Treatment was commonly administered as primary therapy. CT scans were typically performed at baseline and at the midpoint and end of treatment. Additional CT scans were performed for clinical indications (fever or pulmonary symptoms) at the discretion of the treating physicians. Patients were excluded if they did not have comparative pre- and post-treatment CT scans, T cell histology, lacked adequate clinical information in their chart, or had received additional concomitant systemic therapy. IP was defined as the appearance of new or worsened ground-glass opaciification or interlobular septal thickening on post-baseline scans, due to any underlying cause. We compared cohorts of patients who did and did not receive rituximab and documented the incidence of IP during and/or post-treatment in both groups. Concomitant G-CSF administration in each group was documented. Additionally, we compared the incidence of documented infectious IP in patients receiving chemotherapy with and without rituximab. Results: 927 patients were reviewed with 464 excluded as per the aforementioned criteria (370 patients did not have adequate serial CT results available, 59 patients had T cell NHL). Of the 462 patients included, the rituximab-chemotherapy group (n=303; R group: R-CHOP or R-CVP) included 68% DLBCL, 16.5% FL and 6% MCL. The chemotherapy alone group (n=159, C group: CHOP or CVP) included 58% DLBCL, 17% FL and 4% MCL. The median age for the entire cohort was 56 (range 16–88) and was similar in both groups. The rate of smoking was similar in both groups (R-group: 30% vs. C-group: 34%, p=0.43) while G-CSF usage was more common in the R group (40.3 vs 29.6%, p=0.02). The rate of pulmonary CT abnormalities in the entire cohort was 18% (84/462) with a rate of 23.8% (72/303) in the R-group and 7.5% (12/159) in the C-group (p=0.0001). The rate of IP in the entire cohort defined by CT criteria was 5.6% (26/462) with a higher rate in the R group (7.3 vs. 2.5%, p=0.03). The cases were equally divided between asymptomatic IP (12 cases in total 3% R-group, 1.9% C-group, p=0.49) and symptomatic IP (14 cases in total, 4.3% R-group, 0.6% C-group, p=0.04). The rate of G-CSF use did not significantly differ between groups (p=0.21). There was not a significant difference in the incidence of IP due to bacterial infection (p=0.1889), PCP (p=0.7921), fungal infection (p=0.6913), or viral infection (p=0.3056) between the R and C groups although the number of proven infectious events were low (19 cases). Conclusions: The addition of rituximab to CHOP/CVP chemotherapy significantly increases the risk of symptomatic chemotherapy-related interstitial pneumonitis (4.3% vs 0.6%). It does not appear to predispose patients to an increased risk of documented infectious interstitial pneumonitis although these events were rare in this series. Clinicians should monitor patients carefully for this uncommon toxicity as it may impact on the successful delivery of standard treatment. Further data regarding the IP cases are being collected and analyzed for outcome. Disclosures: Kukreti: Celgene: Honoraria; Ortho Biotech: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Crump:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; 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. Kuruvilla:Hoffman Laroche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Otsuka: Honoraria; Genzyme: 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 enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,006

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
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,254
Écart entre enseignants0,246 · 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

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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