Three-Dimensional Telomere Analysis Using Teloview® Technology Predicts the Response of Classic Hodgkin's Lymphoma Patients to First Line Therapy at Point of Diagnosis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Classical Hodgkin's Lymphoma (cHL) has been well studied over the past few decades. Newly diagnosed patients are treated with combinations of chemotherapeutics, the most common of which includes adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD). Approximately 75-85% of newly diagnosed cHL patients show favourable outcomes in response to ABVD treatment resulting in long lasting remission. The remaining 15-25% of diagnosed cHL patients will either show primary resistance to ABVD or relapse during or after the completion of therapy. Despite the fact that cHL biology has been extensively investigated, a robust biomarker to predict initial anthracycline based treatment failure remains an unresolved challenge in the management of the disease. Refractory and relapsing HL patients can be treated with several other treatment modalities including the recently developed brentuximab vedotin, and the PD-1 inhibitors nivolumab and pembrolizumab. The improvement in the outcomes of refractory and relapsed cHL patients treated with such advanced therapeutics presents a rational to advance such therapeutics to first line therapy for all newly diagnosed cHL patients. However, these therapeutics are accompanied with more adverse side effects compared to ABVD, and they present a significantly higher cost burden on the healthcare systems. In addition, clinical studies have shown that not all patients do respond favourably to these therapeutics. In spite of the development of the advanced therapies, the absence of a tool to stratify cHL patients at point of diagnosis remains to be a critical unmet clinical need. In previous reports, the 3-dimensional analysis of telomeres using TeloView® technology conducted on a proof of concept cohort of 27 HL patients revealed that TeloView® analysis, on the group patient level, showed distinct telomere profiles for HL patients who relapsed versus patients who remained stable. In this report, we conducted a retrospective clinical study including a multi-centre cohort of 156 HL patients, 125 remained stable for over 5 years, and 31 patients relapsed within 12 months. We targeted to identify, on the individual patient's level, significant telomeres parameters suitable to predict individual patient outcome at point of diagnosis. General univariate analysis including t-test and Anova identified derived telomeres parameters suitable for predictive modelling analysis including: total and average telomeres length, telomeric aggregates, nuclear volume, quartile nuclear volume and very short telomeres (t-stumps). Multivariate analysis using logistic regression procedures allowed for developing of significant predictive models using combinations of 2, 3 & 4 predictors. The highest predictive power was attained by a 4-predictors model with a predictive power of 0.76 presented as area under the curve (AUC) in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve illustration, achieving 75% positive predictive value, and 71% negative predictive value. The results of this study offer a long awaited path to a precision medicine approach for the treatment of cHL patients. The ready-to-use predictive model will further be validated retrospectively on an independent patient cohort, and can further be validated prospectively in longitudinal studies once the test is adopted in the clinic. Disclosures Louis: Telo Genomics Corp.: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Johnson:Roche/Genentech, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AbbVie: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech, Merck: Honoraria. Ludkovski:Telo Genomics Corp.: Current Employment. Shifrin:Telo Genomics Corp.: Current Employment. Mai:Telo Genomics Corp.: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Knecht:Telo Genomics Corp.: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.
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) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».