An Open-Label, Phase I Study of R-CVP in Combination with Inotuzumab Ozogamicin in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory CD22-Positive B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma,
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Abstract 3715 Background: Inotuzumab ozogamicin (INO) is a humanized anti-CD22 antibody conjugated to calicheamicin, a potent antitumor antibiotic. CD22 is expressed on the majority of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). Although safety and preliminary efficacy data of INO as monotherapy and in combination with rituximab have previously been reported, there is no report of combination use of INO with chemotherapy. This phase I study evaluated the safety of INO in combination with chemotherapy (R-CVP regimen) in patients with relapsed or refractory CD22+ B-cell NHL. Preliminary efficacy data were also collected. Patients and Methods: Patients with either relapsed or refractory CD22+ B-cell NHL and at least 1 prior treatment regimen, including rituximab and chemotherapy, were enrolled in a phase I dose-finding study (part 1), with a planned expansion cohort (n = 10) to confirm the safety and tolerability of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD; part 2), and a further expansion cohort (n = 20) to estimate antitumor activity (part 3). In the dose-escalation study, INO (0.8 mg/m2) was given on Day 2 with R-CVP (rituximab 375 mg/m2, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2, and escalating doses of cyclophosphamide 375, 550, and 750 mg/m2 all on Day 1; prednisone 40 mg/m2 on Days 1–5) q3wks. After the highest dose of cyclophosphamide was evaluated for safety, INO was escalated to 1.3 mg/m2. Dose reductions and/or dose delays were performed, as needed, based on toxicities. The current analysis presents the completed dose-escalation phase, with preliminary safety and efficacy data. Results: 23 patients with follicular (FL; n = 15), mantle cell (n = 3), diffuse large B-cell (n = 3), or small lymphocytic (n = 1) lymphomas (missing diagnosis, n = 1) have been enrolled so far: 65% of patients were male, and the median age was 62 years (range, 42–74 years). In part 1 of the study, approximately 50% of patients had received 2 or more prior chemotherapy regimens, and all had received prior rituximab. As of the time of this analysis, 11 patients had completed at least 5 treatment cycles (ie, ≥105 days on study drug). No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were reported with INO 0.8 mg/m2 plus R-CVP at the lower doses of cyclophosphamide (375 and 550 mg/m2). At a dose level of INO 0.8 mg/m2 plus full-dose R-CVP (cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2), 1 out of 6 patients had a DLT of grade 4 neutropenia requiring treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). At a dose level of INO 1.3 mg/m2 plus R-CVP, 2 out of 3 patients had a total of 3 DLTs (acute hepatitis, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia requiring G-CSF). Therefore, the MTD was determined to be rituximab 375 mg/m2, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 all given on Day 1, INO 0.8 mg/m2 given on Day 2, and prednisone 40 mg/m2 given on Days 1 through 5 of each 3-week cycle. Treatment-emergent grade ≥3 adverse events included neutropenia (57%), lymphopenia (52%), leukopenia (35%), thrombocytopenia (30%), increased alanine aminotransferase (9%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (4%), decreased blood sodium (4%), fatigue (4%), febrile neutropenia (4%), hyperbilirubinemia (4%), hypoxia (4%), lethargy (4%), pleural effusion (4%), and pollakiuria (4%). Enrollment is continuing in parts 2 and 3 of the study. Preliminary efficacy data from the escalation portion of the study (n = 15 evaluable patients) is notable for an overall response rate (ORR) of 87% (33% with complete response; 53% with partial response). In patients with FL, the ORR was 100% (45% with complete response). Conclusions: INO 0.8 mg/m2 appears to be tolerable when given in combination with full dose R-CVP chemotherapy. DLTs were hematologic and hepatic, and encouraging signs of antitumor activity have been reported. Disclosures: MacDonald: Roche Canada: Honoraria, Research Funding. Davies:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Sangha:Roche: Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Honoraria. Crump:Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche Canada: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Ortho: Consultancy, Honoraria. Thieblemont:Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris: Employment; Institut National du Cancer - INCa [French National Cancer Institute]: Research Funding. Ishibashi:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hua:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Paccagnella:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Vandendries:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kobayashi:Ohtsuka Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Nippon Shiyaku: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Tobinai:Bayer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Chugai: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc: Research Funding; Symbio: Research Funding; Zenyaku: Research Funding.
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
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 ».