MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3096309541 · doi:10.1182/blood-2020-139416

Effect of Pembrolizumab Monotherapy Versus Brentuximab Vedotin (BV) on Symptoms Associated with Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL) in the Randomized, Phase 3, Keynote-204 Study

2020· article· en· W3096309541 sur OpenAlexaff
Pier Luigi Zinzani, Radhakrishnan Ramchandren, Armando Santoro, Ewa Paszkiewicz‐Kozik, Robin Gasiorowski, Nathalie A. Johnson, José Salvador Rodrigues de Oliveira, Valéria Buccheri, Guilherme Fleury Perini, Michael Dickinson, Andrew McDonald, Muhıt Özcan, Naohiro Sekiguchi, Monika Raut, Hilde Giezek, Akash Nahar, John Kuruvilla

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreJewish General Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBrentuximab vedotinClassical Hodgkin lymphomaPembrolizumabMedicineInternal medicineOncologyRefractory (planetary science)Quality of life (healthcare)LymphomaRandomized controlled trialHodgkin lymphomaCancerImmunotherapyBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in cHL are lacking, particularly those collected prospectively in clinical trials. Additionally, patients (pts) with cHL can experience B symptoms, such as fever, night sweats, and weight loss, that can result in decreased HRQoL. KEYNOTE-204 (NCT02684292), an open-label, international, randomized, phase 3 study, demonstrated that the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab exhibited statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) vs BV in pts with R/R cHL. The current analysis of KEYNOTE-204 evaluated PROs associated with symptoms of R/R cHL (ie, fatigue, nausea/vomiting, and pain) based on the EORTC QLQ-C30 scale and evaluated the effects of pembrolizumab and BV on the presence and resolution of B symptoms. Methods: Eligible pts were aged ≥18 years, had measurable disease, had ECOG PS 0 or 1, and were R/R cHL after autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) or were ineligible for auto-SCT. Both BV-naive and BV-exposed pts were eligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously (IV) every 3 weeks (Q3W) or BV 1.8 mg/kg IV Q3W and were stratified by prior auto-SCT (yes vs no) and status after first-line therapy (primary refractory vs relapsed <12 months vs relapsed ≥12 months after end of first-line therapy). Symptoms associated with cHL were evaluated as protocol-specified exploratory endpoints using symptom scales of the EORTC QLQ-C30 instrument. EORTC QLQ-C30 was applied electronically at baseline and every 6 weeks up to week 24 and every 12 weeks thereafter. Higher scores on the EORTC QLQ-C30 symptom scales indicated worse symptoms. The analysis population included pts who received ≥1 dose of study treatment and completed ≥1 HRQoL assessment. Both HRQoL and B-symptom data were collected prior to the start date of study drug. Time to first B symptoms was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and treatment differences were evaluated using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Rate of resolution of B symptoms was evaluated using the Mantel-Haenszel relative risk test. Results: Of 304 randomized pts, 296 were included in the PRO analysis (pembrolizumab, 146; BV, 150). Compliance rates were >90% for both groups at baseline and remained high (>80%) at week 24. Mean (SD) baseline EORTC QLQ-C30 scores for fatigue, nausea/vomiting, and pain were 34.9 (24.2), 4.0 (10.3), and 24.6 (25.6), respectively, for the pembrolizumab group and 35.3 (25.6), 8.8 (20.0), and 24.3 (27.5), respectively, for the BV group. At week 24, the mean (SD) baseline EORTC QLQ-C30 fatigue, nausea/vomiting, and pain scores were 21.8 (20.8), 3.6 (10.1), and 12.5 (18.9), respectively, for the pembrolizumab group and 31.4 (17.2), 5.9 (14.0), and 17.4 (20.7), respectively, for the BV group. Improvements in fatigue and pain scores with pembrolizumab were observed at week 6 and remained stable up to week 48; BV exhibited a stable effect up to week 48. No differences were observed over time for pembrolizumab and BV for the nausea/vomiting score. Of 300 pts treated, 78 (pembrolizumab, 42; BV, 36) experienced B symptoms at baseline. Of these 78 pts, 33 (42.3%), 63 (80.8%), and 26 (33.3%) exhibited fever, night sweats, and weight loss, respectively. Of pts who did not experience B symptoms at baseline, 10/106 (9.4%) in the pembrolizumab group and 14/116 (12.1%) in the BV group had symptoms during treatment; median time to first B symptom was not reached in either group (hazard ratio 0.44 [95% CI 0.18-1.04]; two-sided P=0.062). For pts who had B symptoms at baseline, 40/42 (95.2%) in the pembrolizumab group and 27/36 (75.0%) in the BV group experienced resolution of symptoms during the study (risk ratio 1.27 [95% CI 1.05-1.52]; two-sided P=0.013). Conclusion: In pts with R/R cHL, pembrolizumab monotherapy demonstrated early and sustained improvement over BV in HRQoL fatigue and pain measures associated with cHL that were stable over time, whereas the nausea/vomiting measure was stable over time for both pembrolizumab and BV. Additionally, B symptoms were more likely to resolve in pembrolizumab vs BV-treated pts. Taken together, these data along with clinically meaningful improvements in PFS support pembrolizumab as a preferred treatment option for pts whose disease relapses after auto-SCT or who are ineligible for auto-SCT. Disclosures Zinzani: Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kirin Kyowa: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Ramchandren:Seattle Genetics, Sandoz-Novartis, Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company, Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Merck, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Genentech: Research Funding. Santoro:Bristol-Myers Squibb, SERVIER, Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, Sanofi, ArQule: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb, SERVIER, Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, Sanofi, ArQule: Consultancy; Takeda, Roche, Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, AstraZeneca, ArQule, Lilly, Sandoz, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Servier, Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer, MSD: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb, SERVIER, Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer, MSD, Sanofi, ArQule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Arqule, Sanofi: Consultancy; Takeda, Roche, Abbvie, Amgen, Celgene, AstraZeneca, ArQule, Lilly, Sandoz, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Servier, Gilead Sciences, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer, MSD: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb, Servier, Gilead, Pfizer, Eisai, Bayer, MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Paszkiewicz-Kozik:Roche, Takeda, Celgene: Other: Travel/Accommodations/Expenses. Gasiorowski:MSD, Takeda, Novartis, AbbVie: Honoraria. Johnson:Roche/Genentech, Merck: Honoraria; AbbVie: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie: Consultancy. Perini:Janssen, Takeda: Honoraria; AbbVie, Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Dickinson:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. McDonald:venetoclax advisory board in South Africa (in CLL context): Consultancy; Alberts Cellular Therapy: Current Employment. Ozcan:Janssen: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Archigen Biotech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Bristol Myers Squibb: Other: Travel support; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other; Sanofi: Other; Abdi Ibrahim: Other. Sekiguchi:Ono, A2 Healthcare, Astellas, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Otsuka, Pfizer, PPD-SNBL, Sumitomo Dainippon, Daiichi Sankyo, and Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Raut:Merck & Co., Inc.: Current Employment. Giezek:Merck & Co., Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Nahar:Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp., a subsididary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenlworth, NJ, USA: Current Employment. Kuruvilla:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Cons

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 randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,012

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

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 Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,320
Écart entre enseignants0,291 · 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 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

Citations2
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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