MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Rituximab + ESHAP as Salvage Chemotherapy for Relapsed/Refractory Aggressive Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma: A Phase II Trial.

2004· article· en· W2566075579 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa K. Hicks, Rena Buckstein, Eugenia Piliotis, Joy Mangel, Kevin Imrie, David Spaner, Marciano D. Reis, C. Foden, Violet Milliken, Angela Boudreau, P. Richardson, Nancy Pennell, Neil L. Berinstein

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoWestern UniversitySunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabInternal medicineEtoposideSalvage therapyOncologyAggressive lymphomaAutologous stem-cell transplantationChemotherapyGastroenterologyLymphomaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive B-cell lymphoma have a poor prognosis. If sensitive to salvage chemotherapy, high dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) can result in long-term survival for some. Unfortunately, 50% of patients are insensitive to standard salvage regimens and thus are ineligible for ASCT. Hypothesis: Combining Rituximab with ESHAP may improve chemosensitivity and ASCT eligibility, of patients with CD20+, relapsed or refractory aggressive lymphoma, or CD20+ transformed indolent lymphoma. Objectives: The primary outcome was response rate (CR + CRu + PR) to R-ESHAP. Secondary outcomes were toxicity, ability to undergo ASCT, presence of minimal resdidual disease in the stem cell harvest, and progression free and overall survival. Methods: Eligible patients were 16–65 years old, had ECOG performance status 0–2, and had pathologically confirmed CD20+, relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphoma or transformed indolent lymphoma. Patients with refractory disease had a PR with initial anthracycline-based therapy. ESHAP (etoposide 40mg/m2 day 1–4, solumderol 500mg day 1–5, cytosine arabinoside 2g/m2 day 5, cisplatin 25mg/m2 day 1–4) was given every 28 days with GCSF support until < 15% bone marrow involvement was achieved (2–4 cycles). Eight infusions of Rituximab (375mg/m2) were administered weekly concurrent with the first 2 cycles of ESHAP. GCSF mobilized stems cells were collected on day 10 or 11 when < 15% bone marrow involvement was achieved (mainly in cycles 1 or 2). Results: Preliminary results of 14 of 44 planned patients are presented. Median age was 54 years (range 42–64). All pts had CD20+ aggressive lymphoma, 6 had relapsed aggressive lymphoma, 2 had refractory aggressive lymphoma (with PR after initial therapy) and 6 had transformed indolent lymphoma. Twelve of 14 patients were stage III/IV. The response rate to R-ESHAP was 93% (2 CR, 2 CRu, 9 PR, 1 PD). Thirteen of 14 patients proceeded to ASCT. Data on minimal residual disease in the stem cell harvest is pending. Grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and anemia occurred with 53%, 31%, and 20% of R-ESHAP cycles respectively. Two of 14 patients had febrile neutropenia, one with bacteremia. Two patients had non-neutropenic bacteremia (1 with septic shock). There were no toxic deaths. Median follow-up post-ASCT is 5 months (range 1–18). Two patients progressed 4 and 5 months post-ASCT respectively. There were 3 deaths, 2 lymphoma related and 1 due to accelerated Parkinson’s Disease. Median PFS has not yet been reached. Conclusions: This trial is still accruing patients. However, preliminary results are promising. R-ESHAP appears to be well tolerated with a high response rate. This regimen may enable more patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphoma or transformed indolent lymphoma to proceed to ASCT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→