Single-Agent Lenalidomide in the Treatment of Previously Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Lenalidomide is an oral immunomodulatory drug with multiple effects on the immune system and tumor cell microenvironment leading to inhibition of malignant cell growth. Based on encouraging reports of lenalidomide in relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), we investigated the first-line use of single-agent lenalidomide in CLL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using a starting dose of lenalidomide 10 mg/d for 21 days of a 28-day cycle and weekly 5-mg dose escalations to a target of 25 mg, we encountered severe toxicities (tumor lysis, fatal sepsis) in the first two patients enrolled. The study was halted and the protocol amended to a more conservative regimen: starting dose of lenalidomide 2.5 mg with monthly escalations to a target dose of 10 mg, and extended tumor lysis prophylaxis and monitoring. Gene expression profiles from patient samples before and after 7 days of lenalidomide were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled on the amended protocol. No further tumor lysis events were reported. Tumor flare was common (88%) but mild. Grade 3 to 4 neutropenia occurred in 72% of patients, with only five episodes of febrile neutropenia. The overall response rate was 56% (no complete responses). Although rapid peripheral lymphocyte reductions were observed, rebound lymphocytoses during the week off-therapy were common. Lenalidomide-induced molecular changes enriched for cytoskeletal and immune-related genes were identified. CONCLUSION: Lenalidomide is clinically active as first-line CLL therapy and is well-tolerated if a conservative approach with slow dose escalation is used. A lenalidomide-induced molecular signature provides insights into its immunomodulatory mechanisms of action in CLL.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".