MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405126145 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-205666

A Phase 3 Randomized Trial for Patients with De Novo AML Comparing Standard Therapy Including Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin (GO) to CPX-351 with GO - a Report from the Children's Oncology Group

2024· article· en· W4405126145 sur OpenAlexaff
Jessica A. Pollard, Todd A. Alonzo, Robert B. Gerbing, Matthew A. Kutny, Betsy Hirsch, Gordana Raca, Kasey J. Leger, Jennifer J. Wilkes, Aman Wadhwa, Zachary Graff, Reena Pabari, Samir B. Kahwash, Karen M. Chisholm, Joseph H. Chewning, John Horan, Richard Aplenc, Katherine Tarlock, Sarah Menig, Olga Militano, Bonnie Ky, Chad A. Hudson, Lisa Eidenschink Brodersen, Michael R. Loken, Soheil Meshinchi, Anders Kolb

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueHistone Deacetylase Inhibitors Research
Établissements canadiensHospital for Sick Children
Organismes subventionnairesServierAstellas PharmaSyndax PharmaceuticalsIncyteJazz PharmaceuticalsCelgene
Mots-clésGemtuzumab ozogamicinMedicineOncologyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trial

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Survival in childhood AML has plateaued and new therapeutic strategies are essential. CPX-351 (Vyxeos) is a liposomal preparation of cytarabine and daunorubicin with superior pharmacokinetic properties when compared to free drug. The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Phase III clinical trial AAML1831 tested the hypothesis that CPX-351 given during Inductions 1 and 2 would improve treatment outcomes and reduce long-term toxicities compared to a standard chemotherapy. Methods: COG AAML1831 randomized patients (pts) <22 years of age with de novo AML to 2 different induction regimens. Pts with FLT3 mutations were offered enrollment onto gilteritinib-containing regimens and are not included in this analysis. Arm A patients received cytarabine, daunorubicin and gemtuzumab ozogamicin (DA+GO) during Induction 1 and DA during Induction 2. Patients on Arm B received, during Induction 1, CPX-351 on days 1, 3 and 5 and GO on day 6; the CPX-351 dosing was repeated in Induction 2. Centralized risk stratification occurred after Induction 1 and was based on cytomolecular findings and end of induction 1 (EOI 1) minimal residual disease (MRD) >0.05% by central multidimensional flow cytometry. Pts were designated as low risk 1 (LR1; favorable genetics and MRD negative), low risk 2(LR2; pts not in LR1 or HR), or high risk (HR; MRD+ without favorable genetics or any high risk genetics) and received 4 (LR1) versus 5 (LR2) cycles of chemotherapy or 2-3 cycles followed by hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT; HR). Results: A total of 721 eligible pts without FLT3 mutations were randomized to Arm A (n=358) or Arm B (n=363). Age, race, ethnicity and sex were similar for the 2 arms; distribution of risk-defining cytomolecular features were also comparable, with exception of higher rates of inv(16)(p13.1q22.1) (Arm A: 10% vs Arm B: 6%; p=0.03) but not t(16;16)(p13.1;q22) CBFB-MYH11 AML. Pts on Arm A were also more likely to be CNS negative at time of initial assessment (Arm A: 86%; Arm B: 79%; p=0.026). EOI 1 MRD was comparable (Arm A: 23%; Arm B: 23%) and elective withdrawal rates at EOI1 did not differ significantly between the 2 arms (Arm A: 9%; Arm B: 11%). However, Induction 2 treatment toxicities [grade 3 infection (Arm A: 7.4%; Arm B: 27.2%), grade 3 sepsis (Arm A: 3.5%; Arm B: 5.1%)] and median cycle length (Arm A: 35 days; Arm B: 44 days) were higher in Arm B though this did not translate into higher Induction 2 treatment related mortality. Protocol-specified interim analyses using data available on 12/31/23 were performed to monitor efficacy and futility of event-free survival (EFS) for Arm A and Arm B patients without FLT3 mutations. Closure of this randomization was recommended given the futility monitoring rule was crossed. Using a 6/30/24 data cutoff, 2-year EFS from study entry for Arm A was 60.9% (95% CI: 54.3-66.8%) vs. 51.2% (95% CI: 44.7-57.4%) for Arm B (p=0.019) though overall survival (OS) was not significantly different [Arm A: 75.5% (95% CI-69.3-80.5%); Arm B: 74.5% (95% CI - 68.4-79.6%]; p=0.782]. Outcomes for HR patients were comparable for both arms whereas EFS was significantly lower and relapse rates (RR) higher for LR patients on Arm B [2-yr EFS from EOI1: Arm A: 71.9% vs. Arm B 57.8% (p=0.006); 2-year RR Arm A: 16.1% vs. Arm B: 25.4%, p=0.018). EFS from EOI1 in the LR1 patients was particularly impacted (Arm A: 78.3%; Arm B: 62.6%, p=0.029) while LR2 EFS from EOI is Arm A: 67.2 % vs. Arm B: 54.6% (p=0.079); most events reported for either group were relapse. Conclusion The primary randomization of the Phase III study COG AAML1831, a comparison between standard induction therapy and CPX-351, was terminated early because the futility boundary was crossed. The difference in EFS observed was driven mainly by events in LR pts, particularly those that received 4 cycles of chemotherapy (LR1). Further analysis is underway to determine additional factors that may have contributed to the inferior outcomes observed for pts enrolled on Arm B.

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)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,030

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,325
Écart entre enseignants0,307 · 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'étudeEssai randomisé
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

Citations7
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetHistone Deacetylase Inhibitors ResearchTravaux en français237 207