MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4389221884 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-178815

Identification and Clinical Characterization of CNS Relapse in DLBCL Patients across 19 Prospective Phase 2 and 3 Trials - a GLA/ DSHNHL and LYSA Collaboration

2023· article· en· W4389221884 sur OpenAlexaff
Fabian Frontzek, Loïc Renaud, Ulrich Duehrsen, Viola Poeschel, Sophie Bernard, Loïc Chartier, Nicolas Ketterer, Christian Récher, Olivier Fitoussi, Gerhard Held, Olivier Casasnovas, Corinne Haïoun, Nicolas Mounier, Hervé Tilly, Franck Morschhauser, Steven Le Gouill, Imke E. Karsten, Gerben Duns, Christian Steidl, David W. Scott, Wolfgang Hiddemann, Andreas Rosenwald, German Ott, Thierry Jo Molina, Georg Lenz, Marita Ziepert, Bettina Altmann, Catherine Thiéblemont, Norbert Schmitz

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
Établissements canadiensBC Cancer AgencySpinal Cord Injury BCOccupational Cancer Research Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternal medicineDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaRituximabOncologyClinical endpointSalvage therapyClinical trialLymphomaChemotherapy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Depending on clinical and molecular risk factors, CNS relapse occurs in 1-15% of DLBCL patients (pts) and is associated with dismal outcomes. Despite its important role in further improving DLBCL therapy, a comprehensive and large-scale characterization of secondary CNS relapse remains challenging. Methods: We conducteda retrospective analysis of 7775 pts treated within 19 prospective German and French phase 2/3 trials to identify and characterize DLBCL pts with progression or relapse in the CNS. Pts with histology different from DLBCL (subtypes), not treated with anti-CD20 antibody, or displaying CNS involvement at diagnosis were excluded from the analysis. Results: Among 5289 eligible pts, 159 (3%) experienced progression or relapse in the CNS. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range: 19-80 years), 47% of pts were female. In 91% of all cases, reference pathology confirmed the diagnosis of DLBCL. At diagnosis, 28 pts (18%), 62 pts (39%), and 69 pts (43%) had a low (0-1 point), intermediate, and high CNS IPI (4-6 points), respectively. 133 pts received front-line therapy with R/O-CHOP, 19 pts with R-(Mega)CHOEP, and 7 pts with R/O-ACVBP. Following first-line therapy, 54% of pts achieved a CR/CRu. For 131 pts (82%), CNS progress/ relapse represented the first PFS event. Prior to the CNS event, salvage therapy was administered to 30 pts, including 11 pts treated with HDT/ASCT and one pt receiving allogeneic SCT. For 70 out of 158 pts (44%), CNS involvement was classified as intracerebral, 31% showed meningeal, and 3% intraspinal lymphoma involvement. In 22% of pts, CNS involvement was classified as combined including 5 cases with eye involvement. The CNS event occurred as progression without prior CR/ CRu of disease in 61 out of 159 pts (38%). For 155 pts it could be specified that 25% had an isolated progress in the CNS while 12% showed both CNS and concomitant systemic progress. 35% of pts showed an isolated CNS relapse while 28% suffered from a combined relapse. 82% of all CNS events occurred within the first two years after randomization while 29 pts (18%) experienced a late CNS event after 24 months. Notably, 46% of pts with low CNS IPI developed a late CNS event compared to 9% with high CNS IPI at diagnosis (Fisher exact, p<0.001). During the course of disease, 138 pts (87%) showed extranodal lymphoma involvement outside the CNS. The most frequently involved extranodal sites were bone (34%), gastro-intestinal tract (21%), soft-tissue (21%), kidney/ adrenal gland (20%), lung (19%), and liver (18%). In general, pts with CNS event had poor outcomes with a median OS of 3.4 months (95% CI 2.9-4.2) and a 2-year OS of only 15% (10-22%). While sex and initial (CNS) IPI had no impact on OS, we observed significantly worse OS for pts older than 70 years at diagnosis (log rank, p<0.001). OS was poor regardless of the site of CNS manifestation. Pts with isolated CNS disease demonstrated significantly better OS than pts with concomitant systemic involvement (p=0.023). Pts with CNS events occurring later than 24 months from randomization did not show improved OS compared to pts with early relapse/ progression (p=0.19). Treatment categories were reported for 150 pts. 95 pts received immunochemotherapy (IC), 30 pts in combination with radiotherapy (RT). More precisely, 69 pts received salvage therapies containing systemic MTX and 22 pts underwent consolidation with HDT/ASCT (73% of which had thiotepa-based conditioning regimens). Three pts received allogeneic SCT for consolidation. 28 pts were treated with RT alone (+/- intrathecal therapy (IT)). 27 pts received only IT, corticosteroids, or no treatment. Pts consolidated with HDT/ ASCT or allogeneic SCT had superior outcomes with a 3-year OS of 36% (20%-66%) compared to 18% (7.5%-44%) for pts receiving IC and RT, and to 9.7% (3.9%-24%) and 9.5% (2.8-32%) for pts treated with IC or RT alone, respectively ( Fig. 1). Overall, pts achieving a CR after CNS event (38/159, 24%) showed a 3-year OS of 52% (37-73%). Conclusions: This large study including more than 5000 DLBCL pts all treated on prospective clinical trials highlights the unmet medical need to improve the outcome of DLBCL pts suffering from CNS relapse. About one third of pts who underwent transplantation showed long-term survival in contrast to all other pts displaying very dismal outcomes. Novel strategies including targeted therapies and CAR T cells will have to challenge the survival rates reported here.

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)0,023
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,010
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 enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,122

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0230,010
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
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 Opus0,053
Tête enseignante GPT0,443
Écart entre enseignants0,390 · 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

Citations2
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207