MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2906129219 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-118519

Venetoclax Plus Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine and Prednisolone (R-CHOP) Improves Outcomes in BCL2-Positive First-Line Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL): First Safety, Efficacy and Biomarker Analyses from the Phase II CAVALLI Study

2018· article· en· W2906129219 sur OpenAlexaff
Franck Morschhauser, Pierre Feugier, Ian W. Flinn, Robin Gasiorowski, Richard Greil, Árpád Illés, Nathalie A. Johnson, Jean-François Larouche, Pieternella J. Lugtenburg, Caterina Patti, Gilles Salles, Marek Trněný, Sven de Vos, Farheen Mir, Martin Kornacker, Elizabeth A. Punnoose, Divya Samineni, Edith Szafer‐Glusman, Adam M. Petrich, Arijit Sinha, Mehrdad Mobasher, Andrew D. Zelenetz

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusJewish General Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineVenetoclaxRituximabInternal medicineCHOPInternational Prognostic IndexOncologyPopulationVincristineDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaLymphomaCyclophosphamideGastroenterologyChemotherapyLeukemiaChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: BCL2 overexpression leading to evasion of apoptosis is common in hematologic malignancies. In DLBCL, 50% of patients (pts) overexpress BCL2 protein, 30% overexpress BCL2 and MYC (double-expressor [DE]) and 5-10% have translocations of BCL2 and MYC (double-hit [DH]), all of which are associated with a poor prognosis. We hypothesized that combination of the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax (Ven) with chemotherapy would improve DLBCL outcomes based on pre-clinical and early clinical data. The Phase Ib part of the CAVALLI (NCT02055820) study assessed the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of CHOP + rituximab (R) or obinutuzumab (G) with Ven (200-800mg) in non-Hodgkin lymphoma, recommending 800mg of Ven + R-CHOP for Phase II. The single-arm, multicenter Phase II part of CAVALLI investigated the efficacy of Ven + R-CHOP in all first-line (1L) DLBCL pts, by BCL2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) status within cell-of-origin (COO) subtypes, by BCL2 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and in DE and DH pts, with the intent to compare against a matched pt population in the R-CHOP arm of the GOYA Phase III study. Here we report the first safety, efficacy and biomarker analyses in all pts from this ongoing Phase II study. Methods: Eligible pts (age ≥18 yrs; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2; 1L DLBCL; International Prognostic Index score 2-5; ≥1 measurable lesion >1.5cm) were assigned to receive six 3-weekly cycles of R-CHOP + 800mg Ven daily for 10 days (Days 1-10, except Cycle 1: Days 4-10), followed by two 3-weekly cycles of 800mg Ven on Days 1-10 + R on Day 1. The primary endpoint was PET-CT response 6-8 weeks after the last R dose (EoT), according to a modified version of Lugano 2014 criteria. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Biomarker analyses in CAVALLI and GOYA were performed in pre-treatment tumor samples including a BCL2 IHC assay (cutoff: 50% medium/high expression), MYC IHC assay (cutoff 40% signal), BCL2 and MYC FISH, and COO assay (Nanostring). Results: 211 pts were enrolled; 208 received any treatment and were included in efficacy and safety analyses. Overall, pt characteristics were similar for CAVALLI and GOYA, except CAVALLI enrolled more Ann Arbor Stage IV (65.4% vs 47.1%) and BCL2 IHC-positive pts (57.7% vs 50.0%). The EoT complete response rate in all pts did not differ significantly between CAVALLI and GOYA (69.2% vs 62.8%, respectively; Table 1), but was improved in BCL2-positive subgroups, specifically in BCL2 FISH-positive (70.0% vs 47.5%) and DH (71.4% vs 25.0%) pts. With 20 months' median follow-up in CAVALLI, disease progression and death had occurred in 29 and 6 pts, respectively. When compared with GOYA and adjusted for baseline covariates by Cox methodology, PFS improvement was observed in BCL2 IHC-positive pts (HR, 0.53; 95% CI: 0.30-0.93), including within both activated B-cell (ABC; HR, 0.43; 95% CI: 0.19-0.94) and germinal center B-cell (GCB; HR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.17-0.95) COO subgroups. No PFS benefit was observed in BCL2 IHC-negative GCB pts; the BCL2 IHC-negative ABC subgroup was too small for evaluation (Figure 1). Grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 85% (176/208) of pts in CAVALLI versus 66% (373/574) in GOYA; the majority were cytopenias, infections and febrile neutropenia (Table 2). In CAVALLI, 1% (3/208) of AEs were fatal versus 5% (30/564) in GOYA but follow-up was longer in GOYA (57 vs 20 months). The higher rate of AEs in CAVALLI led to dose interruptions/discontinuations of both Ven and R-CHOP; 61% of pts had >90% relative dose intensity (RDI) of Ven; 73.2% of CAVALLI pts had >90% RDI of each of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide versus 76.4% for doxorubicin and 77.6% for cyclophosphamide in GOYA. There were no major differences in grade 3-4 AEs or the RDI of R-CHOP across intention-to-treat and BCL2-positive subgroups. GCSF prophylaxis was recommended, but not uniformly delivered. Conclusions: The addition of Ven to R-CHOP in 1L DLBCL treatment resulted in improved efficacy in BCL2 IHC-positive pts compared with matched GOYA controls. Higher rates of cytopenia, infection and febrile neutropenia were observed in CAVALLI versus the R-CHOP arm in GOYA. These data further support exploration of Ven + R-CHOP in a high-risk population of BCL2-positive 1L DLBCL, including DH pts. Disclosures Morschhauser: Epizyme: Consultancy; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Feugier:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Flinn:Agios: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Gasiorowski:Novartis: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria. Greil:Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sandoz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Illés:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Johnson:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Lugtenburg:Genmab: Consultancy; Squibb: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Bristol-Meyers: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy. Salles:BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Servier: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Trněný:Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Sandoz: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mir:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Employment. Kornacker:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Punnoose:Roche: Equity Ownership; Genentech Inc: Employment. Samineni:Genentech Inc: Employment, Other: Ownership interests non-PLC. S

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)0,001
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 non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,005

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
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 Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,311
Écart entre enseignants0,290 · 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 non 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

Citations32
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207