CCTG LY18‐A phase I master protocol of novel combination therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory lymphoma ‐ the RGDP‐Venetoclax substudy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Therapies for relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B cell lymphomas are expanding. Chemo-immunotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains an important therapeutic option with survival benefit. About 50% of patients (pts) have an adequate response to salvage therapy which is required to proceed to ASCT. Novel salvage regimens may increase response and transplantation rate. Methods: LY.18 is a Canadian Cancer Trials Group Phase I platform trial of novel salvage regimens for patients with r/r large B cell lymphoma. RGDP (rituximab, gemcitabine, dexamethasone, cisplatin) plus venetoclax (RGDP-V) was evaluated in adult pts with diffuse large B cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal B cell lymphoma, transformed follicular lymphoma, or high-grade B cell lymphoma after one prior line of therapy. RGDP was administered at standard doses (Crump, JCO, 2014) for up to 3 cycles pre-transplant. V was administered at increasing dose levels (200–800 mg) according to a 3+3 design, with dose limiting toxicity (DLT) assessed in cycle one. The recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) was the primary outcome. Pts with a partial or complete response (PR or CR) could proceed to ASCT. Response was assessed using both the Lugano criteria and RECIL. Results: Since Sept 2020, 18 pts have been treated at 5 dose levels. Severe myelotoxicity was noted in the first dose level with 2 DLTs observed in the first 4 pts. The trial was amended to mandate G-CSF days 9 to 14 with each cycle of therapy (Table 1). Median age was 59, 4 pts were ≥65 years, 8 were female, median ECOG was 1 (range 0 to 3). Two of 3 pts experienced a DLT at the 800 mg dose. The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) is RGDP-V 400 mg days 4 to 10 of cycle 1, and days 1 to 10 of cycles 2 and 3. There were 7 serious adverse events in 5 pts, including febrile neutropenia (n = 3); grade 2 bacteremia (n = 1); and grade 3 abdominal pain, C2 fracture from fall, and supraventricular tachycardia (n = 1 each), all unrelated. There were 4 deaths on trial; 3 disease related, 1 from transplant-related complications. All grade treatment emergent adverse events occurring in at least 20% of patients were tinnitus, abdominal pain, constipation, diarrhea, dyspepsia, fatigue, pain, headache, and back pain. Grade 3 or greater anemia was seen in 33%, neutropenia in 78%, and thrombocytopenia in 61% of pts. The ORR in 16 evaluable pts was 75% (12/16) (95% CI: 51.7%–92.4%) by both Lugano criteria and RECIL; 2 pts were in CR by Lugano criteria and 3 pts by RECIL. Responses were seen across all dose levels. Stem cell collection >2.0 × 106 CD34+cells/kg was achieved in 9 of 10 pts in whom it was attempted. All 10 pts were successfully transplanted. 4 pts received CART therapy, 1 following progression post ASCT. Conclusion: RGDP-V 400 mg is safe and feasible with encouraging early response rates. Neutropenia was a key toxicity and can be mitigated with prophylactic G-CSF. LY.18 will expand to include 6 more patients at the RP2D. The research was funded by: AbbVie Corporation, Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd Keywords: Aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Combination Therapies Conflicts of interests pertinent to the abstract. S. Assouline Consultant or advisory role: Abbvie, BMS, AstraZeneca, Janssen, BeiGene, Pfizer, Roche Research funding: Novartis Canada D. Villa Honoraria: Janssen, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, Abbvie, BMS/Celgene, Kite/Gilead, Merck, Roche, ONO Pharmaceuticals, Zetagen Research funding: Roche, AstraZeneca A. Hay Research funding: AbbVie, Janssen, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Roche, Karyopharm M. Crump Honoraria: Kyte/Gilead and Novartis Research funding: Roche and Epizyme (Institution) R. Kridel Research funding: Abbvie, Acerta Educational grants: Eisai A. Shamy Consultant or advisory role: Abbvie, BMS, BeiGene, Tahoe, Roche Honoraria: Abbvie, BMS, BeiGene, Tahoe, Roche A. Gerrie Honoraria: Abbvie, Astrazeneca, Janssen, Beigene K. Savage Consultant or advisory role: Seagen Honoraria: BMS, Merck, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Abbvie Research funding: BMS(self), Roche(Institution) Other remuneration: Regeneron(DSMC), Beigen (Steering Committee) L. Shepherd Research funding: AbbVie, Janssen, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Roche, Karyopharm J. Kuruvilla Consultant or advisory role: Abbvie, Antengene, BMS, Gilead, Karopharym, Merck, Roche and Settale Genetics Honoraria: Abbvie, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, BMS, Gilead, Incyte, Janssen, Karyopharm, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and Seattle Genetics Research funding: Roche, Astra Zeneca and Merck Other remuneration: DSMB for Karyopharm
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 | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,003 |
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 ».