MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417014736 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-3895

Preliminary efficacy and safety of the Bruton tyrosine kinase degrader BGB-16673 in patients with relapsed/refractory Richter transformation: Results from the ongoing phase 1 CaDAnCe-101 study

2025· article· en· W4417014736 sur OpenAlexaff
Meghan C. Thompson, Anna Maria Frustaci, John F. Seymour, John N. Allan, Paolo Ghia, Olivier Dumas, Franck Morschhauser, Martin Dreyling, Stephan Stilgenbauer, Inhye E. Ahn, Romain Guièze, Yanan Zhang, Linlin Xu, Kunthel By, Shannon Fabre, Daniel O. Persky, Amit Agarwal, Carlo Visco

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensUniversité Laval
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBruton's tyrosine kinaseIbrutinibChemoimmunotherapyTolerabilityChronic lymphocytic leukemiaPhases of clinical researchLymphoma

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction There is no standard of care treatment for Richter transformation (RT) of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Existing therapies, including chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors ± checkpoint inhibitors, may induce responses, but they are not durable and patient outcomes are poor. BGB-16673 is an orally available protein degrader that blocks BTK signaling by tagging BTK for degradation through the cell's proteasome pathway, leading to tumor regression. CaDAnCe-101 (BGB-16673-101; NCT05006716) is an ongoing open-label, phase 1/2 study evaluating BGB-16673 monotherapy in patients with B-cell malignancies. Here, preliminary safety and efficacy results of BGB-16673 are presented in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) RT who were treated in the phase 1 portion of the study. Methods Eligible patients must have confirmed R/R RT treated with ≥1 prior RT-directed therapy, an ECOG performance status of 0-2 (0-1 in the EU), and adequate organ function; patients with progressive CLL/SLL who had a prior history of RT were included in the RT cohort. In the US, EU, and Australia, patients must have previously received a covalent BTK inhibitor. BGB-16673 was dosed once daily (QD) orally in 28-day cycles (6 planned dose levels: 50-600 mg QD). The primary phase 1 objectives were to assess safety and tolerability per NCI-CTCAE v5.0 and to establish the maximum tolerated dose and recommended dose for expansion. A secondary objective was to assess the overall response rate (ORR) per 2014 Lugano criteria, with the first assessment occurring after 12 weeks of treatment. Results As of May 23, 2025, 24 patients with RT were enrolled and treated in 1 of 4 BGB-16673 dose cohorts (100 mg, n=5; 200 mg, n=7; 350 mg, n=10; 500 mg, n=2). Median age in all patients was 67 years (range, 47-83 years). The median number of prior therapies for either CLL/SLL or RT was 3 (range, 1-11), of which a median of 2 (range, 1-11) were given for RT. Prior therapies included covalent BTK inhibitors (n=20 [83.3%]), BCL2 inhibitors (n=13 [54.2%]), noncovalent BTK inhibitors (n=4 [16.7%]), allogeneic or autologous stem cell transplant (SCT; n=2 [8.3%] each), and chimeric antigen receptor-T cell therapy (n=1 [4.2%]). All patients received CIT for RT prior to study enrollment (23/24 received anthracycline-based CIT). Overall, 19.0% of patients (4/21) had BTK mutations prior to BGB-16673 treatment. At baseline, 83.3% (20/24) of patients had TP53 mutation, 90.9% (10/11) had unmutated IGHV, and 23.8% (5/21) had PLCG2 mutation. Median follow-up was 5.2 months (range, 0.6-17.8 months). In total, 91.7% of patients had any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and 66.7% had grade ≥3 TEAEs. Any-grade TEAEs that occurred in ≥15% of patients were neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (37.5%), nausea (20.8%), diarrhea (16.7%), peripheral edema (16.7%), and pneumonia (16.7%). Grade ≥3 TEAEs that occurred in ≥10% of patients were neutropenia/neutrophil count decreased (33.3%), anemia (12.5%), and pneumonia (12.5%). No cases of atrial fibrillation or febrile neutropenia occurred. Major hemorrhage occurred in 4.2% of patients (n=1; grade 2 subdural hematoma). TEAEs led to dose reductions in 2 patients (8.3%) and to death in 1 patient (4.2%; pyrexia in the context of progressive disease, not deemed to be treatment related). In 21 response-evaluable patients (3 patients with ongoing treatment had not reached the first response assessment by the data cutoff), the ORR was 52.4% (n=11), including a complete response rate of 9.5% (n=2). One patient with an ongoing response discontinued treatment to undergo allogeneic SCT. Responses were seen in 55.6% of patients (10/18) previously treated with a covalent BTK inhibitor, in patients with (4/4 [100%]) and without (7/17 [41.2%]) known BTK mutations, with TP53 mutations (9/18 [50.0%]), and with PLCG2 mutations (2/5 [40.0%]). Median time to first response was 2.8 months (range, 2.6-4.6 months). Among the 11 patients who attained a response, 5 maintained a response for ≥6 months; of the remaining patients, 3 were censored and 3 experienced events prior to 6 months. Conclusions Data from this ongoing study demonstrate that the BTK degrader BGB-16673 has a tolerable safety profile and a promising ORR of 52.4%, with evidence of responses lasting >6 months in heavily pretreated patients with R/R RT.

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: Essai non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,014

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

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

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 Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,272
Écart entre enseignants0,260 · 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 non 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

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchTravaux en français237 207