ESCALADE: A PHASE 3 STUDY OF ACALABRUTINIB IN COMBINATION WITH R‐CHOP FOR PATIENTS ≤65Y WITH UNTREATED NON‐GERMINAL CENTER B‐CELL–LIKE DIFFUSE LARGE B‐CELL LYMPHOMA
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) remains the standard of care for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Although most patients (pts) can be cured, 35–40% will experience relapsed/refractory disease, leading to poor outcomes in the majority of pts. Covalent irreversible Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) have shown higher responses in pts with non-germinal center B-cell–like (non-GCB) DLBCL than with GCB DLBCL. In untreated non-GCB DLBCL pts, the phase 3 PHOENIX study (Younes et al. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1285-95) showed that addition of the BTKi ibrutinib to R-CHOP (R-CHOP-I) did not improve outcomes in the intent-to-treat population. However, pts age <60y treated with R-CHOP-I had significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with those receiving R-CHOP alone. Acalabrutinib (A) is a second-generation BTKi with enhanced kinase selectivity and potential for better efficacy and tolerability than first-generation BTKis. There is a strong rationale for combining A with R-CHOP in pts with untreated DLBCL, and safety of A + R-CHOP has been shown in a phase 1b/2 study (Davies et al. ASH 2020). The aim of this study is to determine if the addition of A to R-CHOP leads to improved PFS in pts age ≤65y with untreated non-GCB DLBCL. Methods: ESCALADE (ACE-LY-312; NCT04529772) is a phase 3, randomized, global, double-blind study of A vs placebo in combination with R-CHOP for treatment of newly diagnosed non-GCB DLBCL. The study is recruiting adults ≥18y and ≤65y with previously untreated DLBCL stage II–IV disease with a Revised International Prognostic Index (R-IPI) score of 2–5. Prior to randomization, all pts will receive an initial R-CHOP cycle (cycle 1) as standard-of-care treatment to prevent delays in therapy initiation. Based on central Gene Expression Profile (GEP) testing performed after enrollment, pts with non-GCB DLBCL (activated B-cell like or unclassified) will be randomized into 2 arms to receive A 100 mg twice daily plus R-CHOP or placebo plus R-CHOP from cycle 2 to cycle 6 followed by 2 additional cycles of rituximab + A or placebo (cycles 7 and 8). All pts will receive primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors accompanying all R-CHOP cycles. The study aims to randomize 600 pts (∼300 per arm). The primary objective is to evaluate whether the addition of A to R-CHOP will prolong PFS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, complete response rate, OS, pharmacokinetics, and safety. Key exclusion criteria are central nervous system involvement, primary mediastinal lymphoma, high-grade B-cell lymphoma, diagnosis or treatment of malignancy other than DLBCL, and history of indolent lymphoma. Approximately 250 sites globally will enroll pts. Enrollment began in Q3 of 2020. EA – previously submitted to ASCO and EHA 2021. The research was funded by: Acerta Pharm, a member of the AstraZeneca Group Keywords: Aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Molecular Targeted Therapies, Ongoing Trials Conflicts of interests pertinent to the abstract L. H. Sehn Consultant or advisory role: Celgene, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics, Janssen, Amgen, Roche/Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Lundbeck, Amgen, Apobiologix, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Merck, Takeda, Teva, AstraZeneca, Acerta Pharma, Morphosys, Incyte, Debiopharm Group, Sandoz-Novartis, Genmab, Verastem Honoraria: Amgen, Apobiologix, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Janssen-Ortho, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Lundbeck, Merck, Roche/Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Teva, TG Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Acerta Pharma, Morphosys, Incyte, Debiopharm Group, Sandoz-Novartis, Verastem, Genmab, AstraZeneca Research funding: Roche/Genentech, Teva B. Kahl Consultant or advisory role: Celgene, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Acerta Pharma, ADC Therapeutics, Genentech, Roche, BeiGene, Bayer, MEI Pharma, Kite/Gilead, MorphoSys, Janssen, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Teva, BMS, Molecular Templates, Incyte Research funding: Genentech, Acerta Pharma, ADC Therapeutics, Celgene Educational grants: Celgene, Juno Therapeutics, Genentech/Roche, AbbVie, Millenium, Seattle Genetics M. Matasar Consultant or advisory role: Genentech, Bayer, Merck, Juno Therapeutics, Roche, Teva, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda; Stock ownership: Merck Honoraria: Genentech, Roche, Glaxosmithkline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Immunovaccine Technologies, Takeda Research funding: Genentech, Roche, Glaxosmithkline, IGM Biosciences, Bayer, Pharmacyclis, Janssen, Rocket Medical, Seattle GEnetics, Immunovaccine Tech Educational grants: Genentech, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Bayer Other remuneration: Expert Testimony: Bayer G. Lentz Consultant or advisory role: Roche/Genentech, Janssen-Cilag, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer, Novartis, Celgene, MorphoSys, AstraZeneca, Gilead Sciences Honoraria: Janssen-Cilag, Bayer, Celgene, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, BMS, MorphoSys, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, AbbVie Research funding: Janssen-Cilag, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca, Aquinox Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, MorphoSys, Gilead Sciences, Verastem, AGIOS Educational grants: Janssen-Cilag, Celegene, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Other remuneration: Expert Testimony: MorphoSys K. Izutsu Consultant or advisory role: Bayer, Celgene, AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceutical, Kyowa Kirin Honoraria: Takeda, Chugai Pharma, Eisai, Janssen, AbbVie, Novartis, MSD, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Ono Pharmaceutical, Mundipharma, HUYA Bioscience International, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Kyowa Kirin, Fujifilm, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Allergan Research funding: Eisai, Chugai Pharma L. Tao Employment or leadership position: AstraZeneca R. Calvo Employment or leadership position: AstraZeneca Stock ownership: AstraZeneca P. L. Zinzani Consultant or advisory role: Verastem, Celltrion, Gilead, Janseen-Cilag, BMS, Servier, Sandoz, MSD, TG Therapeutics, Takeda, Roche, Eusapharma, Kwoya Kirin, Sanofi, ADC Therapteutics Other remuneration: Speakers’ Bureau - Verastem, Celltrion, Gilead, Janseen-Cilag, BMS, Servier, MSD, TG Therapeutics, Takeda, Roche, Eusapharma, Kyowa Kirin
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) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 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) | 0,005 | 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 ».