S205: ZANUBRUTINIB + OBINUTUZUMAB (ZO) VS OBINUTUZUMAB (O) MONOTHERAPY IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH RELAPSED OR REFRACTORY (R/R) FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA (FL): PRIMARY ANALYSIS OF THE PHASE 2 RANDOMIZED ROSEWOOD TRIAL
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: FL is the most common type of indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Approved treatment options are limited for pts with R/R FL. In a phase 1b trial (Blood Adv. 2020;4(19):4802-4811), ZO was found to be tolerable and associated with early signal of efficacy. Aims: To present a primary analysis of ROSEWOOD (BGB-3111-212; NCT03332017), a phase 2, randomized study designed to assess efficacy and safety of ZO vs O in pts with R/R FL. Methods: Pts with R/R FL who received ≥2 lines of therapy, including an anti-CD20 antibody and an alkylating agent, were randomized 2:1 to receive either ZO or O. O was given in both arms on Days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1, Day 1 of Cycles 2-6, and then every 8 weeks up to 20 doses maximum. Z (160 mg twice daily) was given until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity; pts with confirmed PD or no response within 12 months in the O arm were allowed to crossover to ZO. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by independent central review. Secondary endpoints included complete response rate (CRR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Exploratory endpoint included ORR by investigator after crossover. Primary analysis cutoff was October 8, 2021. All pts gave informed consent. Results: A total of 217 pts were randomized to ZO (n=145) or O (n=72). Median study follow-up was 12.5 mo; median age was 64 yrs. Incidence of high FL International Prognostic Index score was 53% (ZO) and 51% (O). Pts received a median of 3 prior lines of therapy, with 28% (ZO) and 25% (O) of pts receiving >3 lines. Proportion of pts refractory to rituximab, refractory to the most recent line of therapy, or with PD within 24 mo of initiation of first-line therapy was 54%, 32%, and 35% with ZO and 50%, 40%, and 42% with O, respectively. The study met its primary endpoint: ORR was 68.3% with ZO vs 45.8% with O (p=0.0017). CRR was 37.2% (ZO) vs 19.4% (O); 18-mo DOR rate was 70.9% (ZO) vs 54.6% (O); and median PFS was 27.4 mo (ZO) vs 11.2 mo (O; hazard ratio [HR], 0.51 [95% CI, 0.32-0.81], p=0.0040). Median time to new anti-lymphoma therapy or crossover was not evaluable (ZO; NE) vs 12.1 mo (O; HR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.23-0.60], p<0.0001). ORR for 29 pts who crossed over to ZO was 24.1%. Median OS was NE; 18-mo OS probability was 85.4% (ZO) vs 72.6% (O). Most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) with incidence >10% in the ZO arm were thrombocytopenia (34.3%), neutropenia (27.3%), diarrhea (16.1%), fatigue (14.0%), constipation (13.3%), cough (11.9%), pyrexia (11.2%), and dyspnea (10.5%). Grade ≥3 AEs with incidence >5% with ZO were neutropenia (22.4%) and thrombocytopenia (14.0%); incidence of atrial fibrillation was 0.7% and major hemorrhage was 1.4%. Incidence of treatment-emergent AEs leading to death was 5.6% (ZO) and 9.9% (O). Summary/Conclusion: ZO demonstrated superior efficacy to O in treatment of pts with R/R FL. ZO had a favorable benefit-risk profile and represents a potential combination therapy for pts with R/R FL.
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 | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,002 |
| 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 ».