Comparison of Outcomes in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) with the Addition of Rituximab to Initial Treatment: A Comparative Effectiveness Analysis in the Province of British Columbia (BC), Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Clinical trials report that chemoimmunotherapy with rituximab (R) improves overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival in the treatment (tx) of symptomatic CLL patients (pts). R has been available for first-line CLL tx in BC, population 4.5 million, since 2004. We compared clinical outcomes with and without addition of R to chemotherapy in a large unselected provincial cohort of pts treated for CLL, to determine the "real world" effectiveness of addition of R to standard chemotherapy. Methods: Three large provincial databases (db) were used to identify eligible pts: the BC Provincial CLL db, the BC Lymphoid Cancer db, and the Providence Hematology CLL db. All pts who received minimum 1 cycle of first-line tx for confirmed CLL were included. Pts with > 1 hematologic malignancy (n=8) were excluded. Baseline features of pts treated with (+R) or without R (No R) were compared using Chi-squared for categorical and Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. OS was calculated from date of initial tx to date of death from any cause. Treatment-free survival (TFS) was calculated from date of initial tx to date of next tx/death from any cause. Multivariate analysis (MVA) was performed using Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate the effect of R on OS/TFS, after controlling for covariates including age (³60 yrs vs <60 yrs), Rai stage (3-4 vs 0-2), CD38 status (pos vs neg), presence of 17p (17p-) and 11q (11q-) deletions, and first-line tx with purine analogs (PAs). Results: A total of 1784 pts diagnosed with CLL from 1973-2014 were identified, of which 726 pts (41%) received tx in follow-up. Of treated pts, 393 (54%) received R and 333 (46%) received chemotherapy alone. Among the No R group, tx included: chlorambucil 56%; fludarabine (F) 34%; cyclophosphamide (C)-based 8%; cladrabine 2%. Among the +R group, tx included: FR 75%; C-based + R 17%; FCR 7%; chlorambucil + R 1%. 103 pts underwent bone marrow transplant (BMT) during their tx course (19% No R vs 10% +R, P=.002). Median age at diagnosis (dx) and tx between groups were not statistically different (No R vs +R: 60.6 vs 60.8 yrs and 64.7 vs 63.9 yrs, respectively). There were no clinically significant differences in diagnostic parameters including % with elevated LDH, lymphocyte count >20x109/L , Rai stage 3-4. Median follow-up time in survivors was longer in the No R group (13.0 vs 6.8 yrs, P<.001). Among 467 pts with known CD38 status, CD38 pos was more common in +R vs No R groups (47 vs 36%, P=.02). FISH was performed in 586 pts, with no significant differences in abnormalities between tx groups. Poor-risk FISH, 17p- or 11q-, were present in 29% (No R) and 27% (+R). Median time from dx to initial tx was 2.8 yrs (range 0-20.6) in No R vs 2.5 yrs (range 0-22.7) in +R groups (P=.84). OS was longer in the +R cohort (median OS 11.8 vs 7.1 yrs, P<.001), Fig. 1. Significant improvements in OS were also seen in pts <60 yrs of age at tx (median OS 11.3 vs 3.1 yrs, P<.0001), without 17p- (median OS 9.3 vs 5.2 yrs, P<.0001), and treated with PAs (median OS 9.4 vs 6.4 yrs, P=.0001). Median TFS was longer in pts treated with R (3.3 vs 2.3 yrs, P= .004), Fig. 2, and in those without 17p- (median TFS 3.1 vs 1.3 yrs, P<.001). MVA confirmed that the addition of R to chemotherapy remained a strong independent predictor of mortality (HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.44-0.98, P=.04) and TFS (HR 0.6, 95% CI: 0.46-0.79, P<.001) after controlling for covariates. Other independent predictors of OS included age ³60 yrs (HR 2.77, 95% CI 1.87-4.10, P<.001) and presence of 17p- (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.62-3.76, P<.001), whereas for TFS, presence of 17p- (HR 2.08, 95% CI: 1.49-2.91, P<.001) and CD38+ (HR 1.32, 95% CI: 1.03-1.68, P=.025) were independent negative predictors. Conclusion: In this large, population based cohort of pts treated for CLL, we confirm that the addition of R to chemoimmunotherapy as initial tx significantly improves OS, resulting in a 44% lower risk of overall mortality (95% CI, 2% to 66%) after controlling for covariates. We have also demonstrated that the addition of R to first-line therapy significantly delays the time to subsequent therapy, a finding not previously reported in a population based setting to our knowledge. This study complements clinical trial [Hallek, Lancet 2010] and US Registry data [Danese, Blood 2011], demonstrating benefit of the addition of R to standard therapy for first-line treatment of CLL and shows the generalizability of such results in a real world setting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Gerrie: Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ramadan:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".