Brentuximab vedotin in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma: An updated review of published data from the named patient program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brentuximab vedotin was available via named patient program (NPP) to patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) or systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma in ∼60 non-US/Canadian countries, before local approval. Published results were examined recently; through systematic literature review, we identified 12 new NPP publications. Most (10/12) publications included new NPP data describing 8 unique cohorts (N=480; all R/R HL) and new participating countries. Overall response rates were 58-80%, and complete remission rates were 10-40%. With median follow-up of 9.5-26 months, median progression-free survival was 5-10.5 months and median overall survival (OS) had not been reached in most cohorts; 1- and 2-year OS was 67-76% and 58-67%, respectively. Tolerability was as expected from previous reports. Despite intrinsic bias and heterogeneous cohorts, this update supports previous findings showing comparable efficacy and tolerability of brentuximab vedotin between real-world practice and phase 2 trial results in R/R HL.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".