PS1071 PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF A PHASE 1 DOSE ESCALATION STUDY OF THE FIRST-IN-CLASS ANTI-CD74 ANTIBODY DRUG CONJUGATE (ADC), STRO-001, IN PATIENTS WITH ADVANCED B-CELL MALIGNANCIES
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Please indicate where the abstract has been published before: The data in this abstract have been published in the Lancet (Horwitz 2019). Background: Peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) is a heterogeneous group of aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) accounting for approximately 10% of all NHL cases worldwide, with a higher incidence reported in certain Asian countries. The most common frontline regimen for PTCL is cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) or CHOP-like regimens; however, anthracycline-containing regimens result in a low rate of complete remission (CR) (Savage K, et al. Ann Oncol 2004). Based on the encouraging activity and manageable safety profile observed in a phase 1 study (Fanale M, et al. Blood 2018), the ECHELON-2 trial was initiated to compare the efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) versus CHOP for the treatment of CD30-positive PTCL. Aims: To compare the effects of frontline brentuximab vedotin plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) versus CHOP as frontline therapy in patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). Methods: ECHELON-2 (ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT01777152) is a phase 3, randomized, double blind, double-dummy, placebo controlled, active-comparator, multicenter study. Eligible adults with previously-untreated CD30-positive PTCL (targeting 75% ± 5% with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma [sALCL]) were randomized 1:1 to receive either A+CHP or CHOP for 6 or 8 21-day cycles. Randomization was stratified by histological subtype as per local pathology assessment and by international prognostic index (IPI) score. The primary endpoint, progression free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR), was analyzed for the intent-to-treat population. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), PFS in sALCL, CR rate, and objective response rate (ORR). Consolidative stem cell transplantation or radiotherapy was permitted at the investigator's discretion after end of treatment. Results: A total of 452 patients were enrolled between January 2013 and November 2016 and 226 patients were randomly assigned to each arm. Overall, the median age was 58 years (range, 18 to 85). The study enrolled patients with advanced disease (Stage III [27%] and Stage IV [53%]; IPI ≥2 [78%]) and most patients (316 patients [70%]) had sALCL (218 patients [48%] anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK]-negative and 98 patients [22%] ALK-positive). The hazard ratios of both PFS (0.71 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.54, 0.93], P = 0.01) and the OS (0.66 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.95], P = 0.02) favored A+CHP over CHOP. The median PFS was 48.2 months (95% CI: 35.2, not evaluable) versus 20.8 months (95% CI: 12.7, 47.6) for A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. The 3-year PFS was 57.1% (95% CI: 49.9, 63.7) for A+CHP compared with 44.4% (95% CI: 37.6, 50.9) for CHOP. Median OS was not reached for either arm. Adverse events (AEs), including incidence and severity of neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy, were similar between arms. AEs leading to death occurred in 7 patients (3%) in the A+CHP arm and 9 patients (4%) in the CHOP arm.Summary/Conclusion: Frontline treatment with A+CHP is superior to CHOP for patients with CD30-positive PTCL as demonstrated by a statistically significant improvement in PFS and OS, with a manageable safety profile.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».