MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3212201454 · doi:10.1182/blood-2021-154492

Autologous Stem Cell Transplant Outcome in Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients in the Era of Post-Transplant Brentuximab Vedotin Consolidation

2021· article· en· W3212201454 sur OpenAlexaff
Shanee Chung, Jennifer White, Cynthia L. Toze, Heather J. Sutherland, David Sanford, Judith Anula Rodrigo, Thomas J. Nevill, Sujaatha Narayanan, Stephen H. Nantel, Florian Kuchenbauer, Kevin A. Hay, Donna L. Forrest, Yasser Abou Mourad, Kevin Song, Maryse Power

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensBC Cancer Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBrentuximab vedotinMedicineABVDDacarbazineInternal medicineAutologous stem-cell transplantationOncologyTransplantationSalvage therapySurgeryLymphomaChemotherapyVincristineHodgkin lymphomaCyclophosphamide

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Patients newly diagnosed with classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL) have over 80% chance of remission with first-line chemotherapy, such as ABVD (adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine) regime. However, 10-40% of patients relapse eventually and require salvage therapy. High-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the standard of care for patients with relapsed or refractory CHL, offering a cure rate of around 50%. This may be further improved to around 60% with post-transplant consolidation with brentuximab vedotin (BV). Post-SCT BV consolidation has been offered to all patients, regardless of the risk group, in British Columbia since late 2015. We set out to review the ASCT outcome in CHL patients in the recent decade at our institution. Methods: All adult patients who received ASCT for relapsed or refractory CHL between July 2011 and June 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. Information pertaining to their demographics, disease characteristics, treatment history, transplant details, clinical outcomes and post-relapse therapy was obtained by review of electronic data. The data cut-off date was June 28, 2021. Survival outcomes were censored at the last known clinic visit for patients without relapse or death during follow up. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival function and log-rank test. Pearson's chi-square test and ANOVA were used for comparison between cohorts. The statistical program used was Stata® version 16.1 (Texas, USA). Results: 114 patients underwent ASCT for relapsed/refractory CHL. Bulky disease and extranodal involvement were seen in 11% and 40% respectively at relapse. Looking at the 'high risk criteria' as defined in the AETHERA trial: 45/114 (40%) patients had primary refractory CHL, 21/114 (18%) had relapsed within 12 months of completing the front-line chemotherapy and 15/114 (13%) had relapsed beyond one year of completing initial treatment but with an extranodal disease. The most commonly used salvage chemotherapy regime was GDP (gemcitabine, dexamethasone, cisplatin; 111/114; 97%). 10/114 (9%) patients received BV after failing salvage chemotherapy pre-SCT. The median number of lines of therapy pre-SCT was two (range 2-5). 94/108 (98%) had a chemosensitive disease with 35/108 (32%) achieving complete remission. 6/108 (6%) patients had a progressive disease at the time of SCT. For the transplant, all patients had a peripheral blood stem cell source and the conditioning regime was either Carmustine/Etoposide/Cytarabine/Melphalan (76%) or Etoposide/Melphalan (24%). After median follow up of 62.2 months, 50/114 (44%) patients relapsed with median relapse-free survival of 20.2 months (range 0.9 - 113.5) and 16/114 (14%) died. The direct cause of death was lymphoma progression in all but three patients (PJP pneumonia, pulmonary fibrosis, traumatic subdural hematoma). Whereas only 4/51 (8%) patients (2 without relapse) received post-SCT BV consolidation via a compassionate access program between July 2011 and October 2015 (cohort 1), 45/63 (71%) patients (33 in remission) received routine BV consolidation between November 2015 and June 2020 (cohort 2). In cohort 2, 44% had primary refractory CHL compared to 33% in cohort 1 but the number of 'low risk' patients was similar at 29% (Table 1). The most common reason for no post-SCT BV consolidation in cohort 2 was patient refusal (7/18; 40%). Other causes included BV pre-SCT, early disease progression and patient comorbidities. Only 9/42 (21%) patients with available data in cohort 2 completed the planned 16 cycles of BV consolidation. The median number of cycles was 10.5 (range 1-16). The most common reasons for early termination of BV consolidation were peripheral neuropathy (22/33; 67%) and disease progression (9/33; 27%). There was no statistically significant difference in PFS or OS demonstrated between the two cohorts (Graphs 1, 2). Conclusion: After median follow up of 5 years, 86% of patients remain alive and 56% are alive in remission. In British Columbia, post-SCT BV consolidation has been widely adopted with over 70% of patients receiving at least one cycle since late 2015. Successful completion of post-SCT BV consolidation is, however, limited by a high rate of treatment-limiting peripheral neuropathy. Relapse-free survival benefit of routine post-SCT BV consolidation is not demonstrated in this single-centre cohort. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures White: Novartis: Honoraria. Sutherland: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Sanford: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stellar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abou Mourad: Amgen: Consultancy; Paladin: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Song: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.

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)0,000
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: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,003

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

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

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,236
Écart entre enseignants0,223 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations5
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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