MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2919509343 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-116750

Prognostic Impact of Germ-Line FCGR2A (H131R), FCGR3A (F158V), and FCGR2B (I232T) Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in Lymphoma Patients Treated with Obinutuzumab or Rituximab in Combination with Chemotherapy: Results from the Phase III GALLIUM and GOYA Clinical Trials

2018· article· en· W2919509343 sur OpenAlexaff
Jonathan C. Strefford, Małgorzata Nowicka, Chantal E. Hargreaves, Chisako Iriyama, Kate V. Latham, Rosalind Ganderton, Helen Parker, Kathleen N. Potter, Andrea Knapp, Farheen Mir, Matthew Rose‐Zerilli, Cathy Burton, Wolfgang Hiddemann, Laurie H. Sehn, Umberto Vitolo, Maurizio Martelli, Marek Trněný, Andrew Davies, Mark Cragg, Mikkel Z. Oestergaard

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Établissements canadiensBC Cancer Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésObinutuzumabRituximabMedicineInternal medicineOncologyLymphomaSingle-nucleotide polymorphismIbrutinibChemotherapy regimenChemotherapyCancer researchBiologyGenotypeLeukemiaGeneticsChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Fc gamma receptors (FCGR) are critical mediators of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody-mediated cell-killing in lymphoma patients (pts). Previous studies have investigated the impact of FCGR genetics on pts' responses to treatment with rituximab (R). In particular, Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) in FCGR2A H131R (rs1801274), FCGR3A F158V (rs396991), and FCGR2B I232T (rs1050501) have been shown to affect either affinity for IgG (H131R; F158V) or receptor activity (I232T) (reviewed in Hargreaves et al. Immunol Rev 2015). Although the impact of these SNPs on effector function has been demonstrated in vitro, their influence on overall pt response is less clear, with multiple small cohort studies reporting inconsistent effects, likely due to their limited size. Therefore, we assessed the clinical importance of FCGR genotypes in two large, international, randomized Phase III clinical trials, assessing their potential impact on the efficacy of R or obinutuzumab (GA101; G) in combination with chemotherapy in pts with untreated advanced follicular lymphoma (FL) (GALLIUM; NCT01332968) and untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) (GOYA; NCT01287741). Methods: Genomic DNA was extracted from peripheral blood mononuclear cells in 2465 pts enrolled in GALLIUM (R-chemo vs G-chemo; n=1144 of 1202 enrolled) and GOYA (R-CHOP vs G-CHOP; n=1321 of 1418 enrolled). The key SNPs, FCGR2A H131R (rs1801274), FCGR3A F158V (rs396991), and FCGR2B I232T (rs1050501), were genotyped in all samples using TaqMan™ discrimination assays, with confirmatory Sanger sequencing employing FCGR-gene-specific polymerase chain reaction primers in 10% of cases. For both trials, our analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) included a univariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for treatment arm, and multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for stratification factors (GALLIUM: FLIPI and chemotherapy regimen; GOYA: IPI, cell of origin [COO], number of CHOP cycles, and BCL2;). In GOYA, we also adjusted for COO and BCL2 protein expression as we have previously shown these to be prognostically significant (Vitolo et al. J Clin Oncol 2017; McCord et al. Blood 2017). Multiple test correction was performed using Benjamini and Hochberg methodology. Results: The demographic and clinical characteristics of the FL and DLBCL pts included were comparable to those previously reported for the entire GALLIUM and GOYA trials, respectively. The prevalence of each FCGR genotype was comparable across trials, observed in both cohorts as: FCGR2A: R131R, 21.2% (523/2465 pts); H131R, 46.5% (1146/2465 pts); and H131H, 32.3% (796/2465 pts); FCGR3A: F158F, 43.6% (1073/2462); V158F, 44.5% (1096/2462); and V158V, 11.9% (293/2462); FCGR2B: I232I, 74.5% (1596/2143); I232T, 23.5% (503/2143); and T232T, 2.1% (44/2143). In FL, only FCGR2B was associated with PFS in univariate analyses comparing I232T to I232I genotype (Figure), with a more modest association for R treated pts (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54─1.14; p=0.21) compared to G treated pts (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.34─0.91; p=0.02). However, neither observation retained statistical significance in stratified analyses. In DLBCL, there was no evidence of a univariate prognostic effect of FCGR genotype. However, in multivariate analysis, we observed an association in the R treatment arm of GOYA with the FCGR2B T232T SNP (HR 4.37; 95% CI: 1.69-11.30; p=0.002 and multiple testing adjusted p=0.03) compared to the I232I pts. However, this observation should be interpreted with caution, given the low prevalence of this genotype (n=13) and limited number of PFS events (n=6). Conclusions: We analyzed FCGR genotype status in 2465 pts with indolent and aggressive lymphoma treated with chemotherapy in combination with R or G and identified no clear prognostic impact of the three key FCGR SNPs. In conclusion, this study, the largest performed to date, provides further conclusive evidence that FCGR genotype does not confer differential responsiveness to R or G in treatment naive pts with advanced FL or aggressive DLBCL. JCS, MN and CH share first authorship, MCC and MZO share senior authorship. Disclosures Strefford: University of Southampton: Employment; F.Hoffman-La Roche: Research Funding. Nowicka:F.Hoffman-La Roche: Employment. Parker:Kay Kendall Leukaemia Fund: Research Funding; University of Southampton: Employment. Knapp:Roche: Employment. Mir:F.Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Rose-Zerilli:Leuka Charity: Research Funding. Burton:NHS: Employment; Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Hiddemann:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; F. Hoffman-La Roche: 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. Klapper:HTG Molecular Diagnostics, Inc.: Research Funding; Regeneron: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; F.Hoffman-La Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sehn:Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria. Vitolo:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Martelli:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffman-La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Advisory board; Sandoz: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; 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. Davies:F. Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; GSK: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cragg:Bioinvent: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties: Patent licenced to Bioinvent around CD32b blockade; Boehringer Ingleheim: Consultancy. Oestergaard:Roche: Employment, Other: Ownership interests PLC.

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

Étiquettes directes de modèles (non validées)

Étiquettes de catégorie et de devis d'étude par modèle, issues des rondes d'étiquetage. C'est une sortie machine, non validée, et le désaccord entre modèles est livré comme donnée. Aucun devis ici n'est encore validé contre MEDLINE.

BrasCatégoriesDevis d'étudeConfiance
gemmaaucune catégorie
Domaine: non disponible · Genre: Empirique
Porte sur le système de recherche canadien: non · Porte sur un sujet canadien: non
Observationnellow
gptaucune catégorie
Domaine: non disponible · Genre: Empirique
Porte sur le système de recherche canadien: non · Porte sur un sujet canadien: non
Observationnelmedium
modèles en accordL'accord compare des ensembles de catégories et des devis identiques entre les bras.

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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
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 randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,011

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
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 recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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 Opus0,064
Tête enseignante GPT0,374
Écart entre enseignants0,310 · 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

Étiqueté directement par 2 modèles lisant le dossier complet.

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

Citations4
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research→Travaux en français237 207→