MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2980054153 · doi:10.1182/blood.v120.21.1633.1633

An Open-Label, Phase 1 Study of R-CVP in Combination with Inotuzumab Ozogamicin in Patients with CD22-Positive B-Cell Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Preliminary Safety and Efficacy Data

2012· article· en· W2980054153 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Michinori Ogura, Kiyohiko Hatake, Andrew Davies, Michael Crump, Kensei Tobinai, Mitchell R. Smith, Fritz Offner, Shaw-Ling Wang, Taro Ishibashi, Luisa Paccagnella, Erik Vandendries, David MacDonald

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCalicheamicinInternal medicineAdverse effectRituximabGastroenterologyRefractory (planetary science)LymphomaNeutropeniaRegimenVincristineFebrile neutropeniaCyclophosphamideToxicityChemotherapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 1633 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's lymphomas (NHL). This phase 1 study was conducted to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of INO when given in combination with R-CVP (rituximab 375 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2, and vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 all on Day 1 and prednisone 40 mg/m2on Days 1–5) every 21 days, and to obtain preliminary safety and efficacy data for this regimen. Patients and methods: The study enrolled patients with relapsed/refractory CD22+ B-cell NHL. The dose-escalation part (Part 1; previously presented) identified the MTD as INO 0.8 mg/m2 given on Day 2 with R-CVP q3wks [Blood. 2011;118:3715]. Subsequent cohorts included the MTD confirmation cohort (Part 2) and MTD expansion cohort (Part 3), for collection of additional safety and preliminary efficacy data. Untreated patients who were not candidates for anthracyclines were allowed in Part 2 and Part 3 of the study. In Part 2 (n = 10), confirmation of the MTD required a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate of <33% in Cycle 1 and fewer than 1/3 of patients discontinuing prior to Cycle 3 due to an adverse event (AE). In Part 3 (n = 22), additional patients were enrolled to explore preliminary signs of activity of INO when given in combination with R-CVP. Results: In Parts 2 and 3, a total of 32 patients with follicular lymphoma (FL; n = 15), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL; n = 16), or mantle cell lymphoma (n = 1) were enrolled. CD22 expression was confirmed by immunohistochemistry or flow cytometry prior to enrollment. The median age was 65 years (range, 44–81 years); 34% of patients had 1 prior anti-lymphoma regimen, 34% had 2, 28% had ≥3, and 3% (n = 1) had no previous therapy (median, 2; range, 0–6). The median number of cycles received was 5 (range, 1–6). In Part 2, the MTD was confirmed as standard-dose R-CVP plus INO 0.8 mg/m2, with 2 of 10 patients presenting with a DLT (grade 3 increase in alanine/aspartate aminotransferases [ALT/AST] and grade 4 neutropenia requiring granulocyte-colony stimulating factor). Four patients discontinued due to AEs after 2 cycles (n = 1), 3 cycles (n = 2), and 5 cycles (n = 1), respectively. Across Parts 2 and 3, the most common treatment-related AEs (all grades) were thrombocytopenia (78%), neutropenia (66%), fatigue (53%), constipation (50%), leukopenia (50%), and nausea (41%); the most common grade 3/4 AEs included neutropenia (63%), thrombocytopenia (53%), leukopenia (38%), lymphopenia (31%), increased ALT (9%), increased AST (6%), and febrile neutropenia (6%). There was 1 case of treatment-related fatal pneumonia associated with grade 4 neutropenia. Ten patients discontinued study treatment due to AEs, with thrombocytopenia or delayed recovery from thrombocytopenia being the leading AE causing study drug discontinuation (n = 9 [grade 1/2, n = 6; grade 3/4, n = 3]). The best overall response (ORR; partial + complete response [CR]) from Part 2 and 3 (31 evaluable patients) was 77% (n = 24/31), including 29% (n = 9/31) with CR. Of patients with FL, the ORR was 100% (n = 15/15), including 53% (n = 8/15) with CR. Of patients with DLBCL, the ORR was 60% (n = 9/16), including 7% (n = 1/16) with CR. Conclusions: Results from this phase I study showed that R-CVP in combination with INO 0.8 mg/m2 may have acceptable toxicity and promising activity in patients with relapsed or refractory CD22+ B-cell NHL, based on the response rates in FL and DLBCL. The most common grade 3/4 AEs were hematological toxicities, notably thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. Follow-up for progression-free survival and overall survival is currently ongoing; however, the observed results warrant additional study in both indolent and aggressive B-cell NHL. Disclosures: Ogura: Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Hatake:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Davies:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Crump:Pfizer, Celgene, Roche, Millennium, Seattle Genetic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tobinai:Merck, Zenyaku, Symbio, Biomedics, Pfizer, GSK, Chugai/Roche: Research Funding. Smith:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Offner:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Wang:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ishibashi:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Paccagnella:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vandendries:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. MacDonald:Roche Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, 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 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)0,001
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 enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,010

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,020
Tête enseignante GPT0,299
Écart entre enseignants0,279 · 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

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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