Nivolumab Combined with Brentuximab Vedotin for Relapsed/Refractory Primary Mediastinal Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Preliminary Results from the Phase 2 CheckMate 436 Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».