MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4417018967 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-1860

Favorable safety and efficacy in a phase II trial using duvelisib maintenance after autologous stem cell transplant in T-cell and B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas

2025· article· en· W4417018967 sur OpenAlexaff
Hunter Cochran, Raya Saba, Ningying Wu, Neha Mehta–Shah, Armin Ghobadi, John F. DiPersio, Amanda F. Cashen

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensCanadian Cancer Society
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMaintenance therapyLymphomaPhases of clinical researchClinical trialAdverse effectDosingStem cellSafety profile

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) is a rare, aggressive group of non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL), including PTCL-not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), and anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL). For patients who achieve remission, autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the standard consolidative approach. However, relapse remains common, and no post-ASCT maintenance therapies are currently approved. In the NLG-T-01 study, the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) following upfront ASCT was 44%, and overall survival (OS) was 51%, underscoring the need for strategies to prolong remission in this high-risk population. Duvelisib, an oral dual PI3K-δ/γ inhibitor, has demonstrated clinical activity in relapsed/refractory PTCL. In the PRIMO study, duvelisib achieved an overall response rate (ORR) of 48% and complete response rate (CRR) of 33%, with a manageable safety profile using a dose-optimized approach. Given its clinical activity across PTCL subtypes and manageable toxicity, we hypothesized that maintenance therapy with low-dose duvelisib following ASCT could improve PFS. We conducted a study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of post-transplant duvelisib maintenance in patients with PTCL. Methods This single-center, phase II trial enrolled duvelisib-naive patients with TCL or B-NHL who underwent consolidative ASCT. Following a safety lead-in, enrollment was limited to TCL. Duvelisib maintenance began after hematologic recovery (day +30) and continued for up to 11 cycles. Due to tolerability, the initial dosing (25 mg BID, days 1–28) was amended after 7 patients with a modified schedule (25 mg BID, days 1–14 of a 28-day cycle). Response assessment scans occurred at the end of cycle 2 and subsequently every 3 cycles. Those with stable (SD) or progressive disease (PD) were taken off study. All patients received PJP and herpesvirus prophylaxis. Results Seventeen patients were enrolled from July 2020 to July 2024. Histologic subtypes included PTCL-NOS (n = 6), ALCL (n = 4), AITL (n = 2), and transformed follicular lymphoma (tFL, n = 5). Ten patients were male; the median age at ASCT was 59 years (range, 24–69). Twelve patients had stage III/IV disease at diagnosis. Pre-transplant responses included 16 in complete remission (CR) and 1 in partial remission (PR). Among the 12 patients with TCL, 11 (92%) were in first CR/PR and 1 was in CR2 at the time of transplant. The median treatment durations for Schedules 1 and 2 were 5.4 months (Interquartile Range [IQR], 2.8–11.1) and 11.3 months (IQR, 7.5–11.8), respectively, with median follow-up of 17.2 (IQR, 14.6–22.5) and 19.0 months (IQR, 8.7–23.3), respectively. All twelve patients with TCL were included in the efficacy analysis. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached (NR) (95% CI, 5.9–NR), and median overall survival (OS) was 35.6 months (95% CI, NR–NR). At 12 months, PFS and OS were 83.3% (95% CI, 48.2–95.6%) and 91.7% (95% CI, 53.9–98.8%), respectively. All 17 patients were included in the safety analysis. Three of 7 patients treated on Schedule 1 discontinued duvelisib due to toxicity: one grade 3 elevated liver enzymes, one grade 3 diarrhea, and one muscle weakness (unlikely related to duvelisib nor disease progression). This prompted a protocol amendment to Schedule 2, with subsequent improvement in tolerability. The most common adverse events (AEs) were hematologic, gastrointestinal, and hepatic. Grade 3 treatment-related AEs were observed in 9 patients, including febrile neutropenia (n = 1), lymphopenia (n = 3), diarrhea (n = 1), pneumonia (n = 1), and elevated liver enzymes (n = 3). There was one Grade 4 AE, lymphopenia, and no treatment-related deaths. Infectious events occurred in 7 patients, including thrush (n = 2), upper respiratory tract infections (n = 3), sinusitis (n = 1), and pneumonia (n = 1); none of these infections led to treatment holds or dose reductions. Four patients have relapsed (TCL, n = 2; tFL, n = 2), and 15 of 17 remain alive to date. Conclusion Duvelisib maintenance for up to one-year post-ASCT was safe and generally well tolerated, especially with the modified intermittent dosing schedule (25 mg BID, days 1–14 of a 28-day cycle). In patients with TCL, duvelisib maintenance yielded promising disease control and compares favorably to historical outcomes in this high-risk population. Given the promising results, a larger multicenter phase 3 trial is warranted.

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)0,002
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 randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,013

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
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 Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,252
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · 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

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

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