MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417008866 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-3582

Phase 3 study (inMIND) of tafasitamab plus lenalidomide and rituximab for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma: Clinical characteristics and outcomes by age

2025· article· en· W4417008866 sur OpenAlexaff
Christina Poh, Francisco J. Hernandez‐Ilizaliturri, Marek Trněný, Julie M. Wu, Philomena Colucci, Oscar Bortolami, Laurie H. Sehn

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLenalidomideRituximabFollicular lymphomaRefractory (planetary science)PopulationPhases of clinical researchPlaceboPost-hoc analysisNeutropeniaProgression-free survival

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Incidence of follicular lymphoma (FL) increases with age and patients (pts) often relapse, requiring multiple lines of therapy. Tafasitamab (tafa), a humanized CD19-targeting monoclonal antibody (mAb), in combination with lenalidomide (len) + rituximab (R) was recently approved for treatment of adults with relapsed or refractory FL (R/R FL) in the US. At the primary analysis of inMIND (NCT04680052), an international, phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo (pbo)-controlled trial, tafa+len+R demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS in pts with R/R FL with a 57% reduction in the risk of progression or death and a safety profile as expected in the pt population (Sehn LH, et al. Blood. 2024;144[Suppl 2]:LBA1). This post hoc analysis evaluates efficacy and safety in pts enrolled in inMIND by age. Methods Eligible pts were aged ≥18 y with R/R CD19+ and CD20+ FL (grade 1-3A) and ECOG PS ≤2, who had received ≥1 prior systemic therapy including an anti-CD20 mAb. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive tafa 12 mg/kg IV or pbo with standard dosing of len+R for up to 12×28-day cycles. Pts with moderate renal insufficiency (CrCl ≥30 to <60 mL/min) were also eligible and received a reduced starting dose of len at 10 mg daily. Analyses included PFS by investigator (primary endpoint) and safety in pts <65 y and ≥65 y, and in pts <75 y and ≥75 y. Results Overall, 548 pts were randomized to the tafa arm (n=273) or pbo arm (n=275). Of the total pts enrolled in both treatment arms, 50% were <65 y (tafa, n=137; pbo, n=139), 50% were ≥65 y (tafa, n=136; pbo, n=136), 80% were <75 y (tafa, n=219; pbo, n=221), and 20% were ≥75 y (tafa, n=54; pbo, n=54). Baseline characteristics were generally similar between the tafa and pbo arms within age categories; median time since FL diagnosis (<65 y, 4.6 y and ≥65 y, 6.4 y; <75 y, 5.1 y and ≥75 y, 6.7 y) and proportions of pts with FLIPI score ≥3 (<65 y, 40% and ≥65 y, 65%; <75 y, 50% and ≥75 y, 64%) were higher in pts ≥65 y vs <65 y and ≥75 y vs <75 y. Proportions of pts with CrCl 30 to <60 mL/min were 5% and 34% in pts <65 y and ≥65 y and 11% and 52% in pts <75 y and ≥75 y, respectively. For pts <65 y, median investigator-assessed PFS was not reached with addition of tafa vs 12.0 months with pbo (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI] 0.35 [0.22, 0.55]), and for pts ≥65 y was 20.0 months with tafa vs 15.0 months with pbo (HR [95% CI] 0.53 [0.35, 0.80]). Improvements were also observed in pts <75 y and ≥75 y: median investigator-assessed PFS was 23.6 months with addition of tafa vs 14.4 months with pbo (HR [95% CI] 0.44 [0.31, 0.61]) for pts <75 y, and 15.0 months with addition of tafa vs 13.0 months with pbo (HR [95% CI] 0.58 [0.30, 1.12]) in pts ≥75 y. The small number of pts ≥75 y limits interpretation of these data. TEAEs were reported for >98% of pts in the tafa or pbo arm across age subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were reported for 66% of pts <65 y in the tafa arm and 65% of pts in the pbo arm, and for 76% of pts ≥65 y in the tafa arm and 75% of pts in the pbo arm. Serious TEAEs were reported for 34% of pts <65 y in the tafa arm and 30% of pts in the pbo arm, and for 39% of pts ≥65 y in the tafa arm and 34% of pts in the pbo arm. Fatal TEAEs occurred in 1 pt (1%) <65 y in both the tafa and pbo arms and in 5 pts (4%) ≥65 y in both the tafa and pbo arms. Tafa or pbo discontinuations due to TEAEs were recorded for 10% and 6% of pts <65 y, and for 12% and 8% of pts ≥65 y in the tafa and pbo arms, respectively. Grade 3 or 4 TEAEs were reported for 69% and 68% of pts <75 y and for 80% and 74% of pts ≥75 y in the tafa and pbo arms, respectively. Serious TEAEs were reported for 35% of pts <75 y in the tafa arm and 28% of pts in the pbo arm, and for 41% of pts ≥75 y in the tafa arm and 44% of pts in the pbo arm. Fatal TEAEs occurred in 4 pts (2%) and 2 pts (4%) <75 y, and in 3 pts (1%) and 3 pts (6%) ≥75 y in the tafa and pbo arms, respectively. Tafa or pbo discontinuations due to TEAEs were reported for 10% of pts <75 y in the tafa arm and 6% of pts in the pbo arm, and for 17% of pts ≥75 y in the tafa arm and 11% of pts in the pbo arm. Data on tafa and len dose reduction will be presented. Conclusions This analysis confirms that tafa+len+R reduced risk of progression or death measured by PFS irrespective of pt age, including older pts up to 88 y and with moderate renal insufficiency. The safety profile was manageable across older and younger pts with toxicities as expected for the pt population.

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)0,001
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: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,014

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

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 Opus0,028
Tête enseignante GPT0,355
Écart entre enseignants0,327 · 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

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→Travaux en français237 207→