Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin (GO) In Children With De Novo Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Improves Event-Free Survival (EFS) By Reducing Relapse Risk – Results From The Randomized Phase III Children’s Oncology Group (COG) Trial, AAML0531
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
![Graphic][1] Background Escalation of treatment intensity for childhood acute myeloid leukemia has improved EFS but with excessive toxicity and toxic mortality (TM), compelling a search for more targeted less toxic alternatives. Objective To determine if the addition of GO to standard chemotherapy improves EFS in pediatric AML. Methods Patients < 30 years of age were randomly assigned to receive standard therapy alone (noGO) or to receive two doses of GO 3 mg/m2/dose on day 6 of Induction I (IndI) and on day 7 of Intensification II (IntII) in a 5 cycle chemotherapy backbone previously piloted by COG (Cooper et al, Cancer 2012). Use of stem cell transplant (SCT) was stratified by overall risk group assignment (based on cytogenetics, FLT3-ITD high allelic ratio (HAR), and IndI response) in which high risk patients were allocated to best allogeneic donor SCT after Int I, low risk (LR) patients received chemotherapy only, and intermediate risk (IR) were assigned to SCT if there was a matched family donor (MFD). Results Between 2006-2010, 1022 of 1070 enrolled non-DS pts were eligible for analysis; characteristics are presented in [Table 1][2]. Median follow-up was 3.6 (range 0-6.4) years for those alive. View this table: Table 1 Characteristics of randomized patients Protocol therapy was well tolerated with a TM of 2% in induction and 5% overall with no difference by study arm. VOD was observed in 3% (severe in 0.6%) with no difference by study arm. From time of enrollment, GO was significantly associated with better overall EFS (hazard ratio (HzR) 0.83 (95% CI: 0.7-0.99; p=.04) and relapse-free survival (HzR 0.74 (0.6-0.93; p=.01)) whereas OS was not significantly improved (HzR 0.91 (0.74-1.13)). At 3 yr, noGO v GO EFS was 47 v 53%, p=.05 and OS was 65 v 69%, p=.18. In multivariate analyses, GO was significantly associated with improved EFS than standard therapy after adjustment for significant adverse risk factors: age 100,000x109/L, and black race. GO was not associated with significantly better induction complete remission (CR) when compared to standard therapy (88% v 85%; p=NS). [Table 2][3] illustrates the overall results by randomized arm and by overall risk group from time of CR showing a consistent reduction in relapse risk in all risk groups. Further risk group analysis found several unique results. In the LR group, relapse rates (RR) trended lower in the GO arm but the benefit was reduced by TM during Int 2 & 3 that was significantly worse in the GO arm (3 v 10%, p=.02). In the IR group, EFS, RR, and OS trended towards improvement with GO. However when pts were censored at the time of SCT (as treated), the outcomes were not significantly different between arms (log-rank p=.14 EFS and p=.81 OS). [Table 1][2] shows an imbalance for SCT received in assigned IR pts with fewer actually receiving SCT in the noGO arm. As such, [Table 2][3] shows outcomes by intent-to-treat for IR pts with MFD censored and by as treated for IR pts receiving MFD SCT. Noteworthy in the IR group alone who did receive a SCT, GO arm pts had a significantly better DFS than the noGO arm (intent to treat: p=.022; as treated: p=.044). However, for the IR pts randomized to the noGO arm, SCT failed to provide benefit. For HR pts achieving CR they as well trended towards better survival & RR in the GO arm. View this table: Table 2 Outcomes by randomized treatment assignment following CR Conclusion GO improves EFS in children, adolescents and young adults with AML by reducing the risk of relapse among those achieving remission. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare. [1]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [2]: #T1 [3]: #T2
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) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
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 ».