Phase II multicenter study of oblimersen sodium, a Bcl‐2 antisense oligonucleotide, in combination with rituximab in patients with recurrent B‐cell non‐Hodgkin lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oblimersen sodium plus rituximab was evaluated in relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients. Oblimersen was administered as a continuous intravenous infusion at a daily dose of 3 mg/kg/d for 7 d on alternate weeks for 3 weeks. Rituximab was given at a weekly dose of 375 mg/m(2) for six doses. Patients with stable disease or objective response were allowed to receive a second course of treatment. The overall response rate (ORR) was 42% with 10 complete responses (CR) and eight partial responses (PR). Twelve (28%) patients achieved a minimal response or stable disease. Among the 20 patients with follicular lymphoma the ORR was 60% (eight CR, four PR). Three of the responders were refractory to prior treatment with rituximab, and two of the responses occurred in patients who had failed an autologous stem cell transplant. Median duration of response was 12 months. Most toxicities were low grade and reversible. In conclusion, oblimersen sodium can be safely combined with rituximab. The combination appears to be most beneficial in patients with indolent NHL and warrants further investigation in a large randomized trial.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".