MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3217731474 · doi:10.1182/blood-2021-146103

Favorable Outcomes with Thiotepa/Busulfan-Based Conditioning and Autotransplant for Patients with Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma and Secondary CNS Involvement

2021· article· en· W3217731474 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Puckrin, Neil Chua, Mona Shafey, Douglas A. Stewart

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensFoothills Medical CentreUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésThioTEPAMedicineBusulfanDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaInternal medicineLymphomaOncologyTransplantationRegimenSurgeryChemotherapyHematopoietic stem cell transplantationCyclophosphamide

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction : Central nervous system (CNS) relapse is a devastating complication affecting ~5% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The optimal management is unknown and survival rates are ~20% in contemporary series. Thiotepa/busulfan-based high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) and autotransplant (ASCT) has demonstrated efficacy in primary CNS lymphoma, but there have been fewer studies of this conditioning regimen in secondary CNS lymphoma (SCNSL). Methods : This multicenter retrospective study included all consecutive patients ≥18 years old with aggressive B-cell lymphoma and secondary CNS involvement treated with thiotepa/busulfan-based HDT/ASCT at the University of Calgary and University of Alberta since 2005. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and disease-specific survival (DSS) from the time of ASCT. Data collection is underway for all consecutively diagnosed SCNSL patients at our institutions to evaluate frequency and predictors of HDT/ASCT use. Results : This study included 57 patients with DLBCL (n=45), double-hit lymphoma (n=6), high-grade B-cell lymphoma NOS (n=2), intravascular large B-cell lymphoma (n=2), or T-cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell lymphoma (n=2). Two (4%) had previously treated indolent B-cell lymphoma and 1 (2%) had multiply relapsed DLBCL. Median International Prognostic Index was 4 (range 0-5) at DLBCL diagnosis and median time to CNS relapse was 4 months (range 0-139). Median age was 58 years (range 20-73) and median ECOG was 3 (range 0-4) at diagnosis of SCNSL. CNS involvement was present at initial diagnosis in 20 (35%) patients or developed during frontline treatment in 10 (18%) or after completion of treatment in 27 (47%). For those without SCNSL at diagnosis, isolated CNS relapse occurred in 31 (84%) patients while 6 (16%) had concurrent CNS and systemic relapse. Most patients (n=54, 94%) received high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)-based multiagent induction chemotherapy (median HD-MTX doses 4, range 1-5) followed by peripheral blood stem cell mobilization with rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin (R-DHAP) in 41 (72%). HDT conditioning regimens were thiotepa, busulfan, melphalan, rituximab (TBMR, n=52, 91%) or thiotepa, busulfan, cyclophosphamide (TBC, n=5, 9%). Median time from SCNSL diagnosis to ASCT was 116 days (range 7-201). Median time to neutrophil engraftment was 10 days (range 7-15) and to platelet engraftment 16 days (range 9-93). Overall response rates (ORR) for systemic/CNS disease were 93%/89% pre-ASCT and 95%/100% post-ASCT. Combined ORR pre-ASCT was 88%, with complete response in 21% and partial response in 67%. Two (4%) patients who developed CNS relapse immediately prior to ASCT achieved long-term remission after TBMR conditioning without any other systemic chemotherapy. With a median follow-up time of 4.0 years (range 0.1-15.9), PFS was 75% (95% CI 61-85%), OS was 76% (95% CI 62-86%), and DSS was 79% (95% CI 64-88%) at 4 years after ASCT. Lymphoma recurred in 9 (16%) patients at median 88 days (range 54-346) after ASCT with CNS relapse (n=4), systemic relapse (n=3), or both (n=2). There were 2 (4%) deaths due to peri-transplant toxicity and 1 (2%) death at 1.5 years due to therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia; no other unexpected toxicities of HDT/ASCT were observed. Among the 45 (79%) patients achieving long-term disease-specific survival, none were treated with CNS radiation therapy and only 1 (2%) had persistent neurocognitive impairment. There were no significant differences in DSS with respect to timing of CNS relapse, concurrent presence of systemic disease, or TBMR versus TBC conditioning (78% vs 80%, p=0.87). Conclusion : In one of the largest studies of this conditioning regimen in SCNSL to date, we found that high-dose thiotepa/busulfan-based conditioning with ASCT is associated with favorable outcomes for patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma and secondary CNS involvement, with 4-year OS ~75% in this study. Although SCNSL has been historically associated with a poor prognosis, an increasing proportion of patients may achieve long-term survival after intensive therapy with HD-MTX-based induction and thiotepa/busulfan-based HDT and ASCT. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Chua: Eisai: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Stewart: Novartis: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria; Teva: 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 enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,004

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
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
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 Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,206
Écart entre enseignants0,200 · 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

Citations1
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207