MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2908676058 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-112069

Nivolumab Combined with Brentuximab Vedotin for Relapsed/Refractory Primary Mediastinal Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Preliminary Results from the Phase 2 CheckMate 436 Trial

2018· article· en· W2908676058 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Alison J. Moskowitz, Armando Santoro, Giuseppe Gritti, Pauline Brice, David Cunningham, Paul M. Barr, Justin Kline, John Kuruvilla, Nathalie A. Johnson, Neha Mehta–Shah, Thomas Manley, Manish Sharma, Stephen Francis, J. Cohen, Pier Luigi Zinzani

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensJewish General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBrentuximab vedotinNivolumabMedicineCD30OncologyInternal medicineLymphomaPopulationCancer researchImmunologyImmunotherapyCancer

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: About 20% of patients (pts) with primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBL) are not cured after first-line treatment; those with chemosensitive relapse may benefit from autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT). However, outcomes remain poor for pts with chemorefractory disease and those who have relapsed after auto-HCT. In PMBL, there is increased expression of the programmed death-1 (PD-1) ligands and expression of CD30 on tumor cells. Evasion of host immune responses by tumor cells may lead to resistance to standard chemotherapy. Nivolumab is a fully human IgG4 monoclonal antibody that binds to immune checkpoint PD-1, abrogates tumor inhibitory signals, and augments host antitumor immune response. Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an antibody-drug conjugate that binds to CD30-expressing cells and induces apoptosis and immunogenic cell death. Combination of nivolumab and BV may therefore have synergistic antitumor activity against relapsed/refractory PMBL (rrPMBL). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of nivolumab + BV in this pt population. Methods: This expansion cohort of a phase 1/2 open-label, single-arm, international study (NCT02581631) enrolled pts with PMBL aged ≥15 years, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤1, confirmed CD30 expression in ≥1% of tumor cells, measurable disease per Lugano 2014 classification, and relapsed/refractory disease after either high-dose conditioning chemotherapy and auto-HCT, or ≥2 prior multi-agent chemotherapies if auto-HCT ineligible. Nivolumab (240 mg IV flat dose) and BV (1.8 mg/kg IV, prespecified dose modifications allowed) were received every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Pts were evaluated for safety (primary objective) continuously during treatment and at scheduled intervals during follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used to present pt characteristics and adverse events (AEs). The primary efficacy endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) according to Lugano 2014 classification. Results: At database lock, 30 pts were treated with nivolumab + BV and included in this interim analysis. At enrollment, median (range) age was 35.5 (19-83) years. Thirteen pts (43%) had stage III or IV disease at initial diagnosis. Pts had received a median of 2 prior systemic therapies before enrollment, and 4 (13%) received auto-HCT (Table). Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were reported in 25 pts (83%). The most frequently reported TRAEs were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), and hyperthyroidism (13%). Grade 3-4 TRAEs were reported in 10 pts (33%), including 8 pts (27%) with neutropenia, 2 pts (7%) each with thrombocytopenia or decreased neutrophil count, and 1 pt (3%) each with hypersensitivity, diarrhea, or maculopapular rash. Three pts (10%) had treatment-related serious AEs, including 1 pt with grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash, and 1 pt with grade 5 acute kidney injury. At the time of the meeting, ORR and complete remission rate will be presented based on a planned interim analysis. Conclusions: These results demonstrate that in pts with CD30-expressing rrPMBL, the combination of nivolumab and BV has a manageable safety profile and may provide a potential treatment option for this patient population. Study support: BMS. Writing support: Janice Zhou, Caudex, funded by BMS. Table. Table. Disclosures Moskowitz: Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Cunningham:Roche pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Barr:AbbVie, Gilead: Consultancy. Kline:iTeos: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kuruvilla:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Princess Margaret Cancer Foundation: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Canada: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Johnson:Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Research Funding. Mehta-Shah:Spectrum: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Manley:Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sharma:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Francis:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Other: company stock options. Cohen:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Other: company stock ownership. Zinzani:BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SERVIER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria, 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)0,001
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 seuil0,008

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
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 Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,257
Écart entre enseignants0,241 · 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

Citations4
Publié2018
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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