MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2580774047 · doi:10.1182/blood.v106.11.923.923

Bendamustine HCl (TREANDATM) Treatment in Combination with Rituximab Results in Objective Responses in Patients with Refractory/Relapsed Indolent B-Cell and Mantle Cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: Results from Phase II Multicenter Study (SDX-105-02).

2005· article· en· W2580774047 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katherine Robinson, Michael E. Williams, Philip Cohen, Anil Tulpule, Richard H. van der Jagt, Jordan A. Herst, Robin Joyce, Alberto Bessudo, Bernard Lemieux, Lee S. Schwartzberg, Jennifer Oliver, Ely Benaim

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsNortheast Cancer CentreHôpital Notre-DameOttawa Public HealthQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBendamustineMantle cell lymphomaMedicineRituximabInternal medicineFollicular lymphomaGastroenterologyNon-Hodgkin's lymphomaPopulationLymphomaOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Bendamustine hydrochloride (SDX-105; TreandaTM) is a multifunctional, alkylating agent with a purine-like ring system and novel mechanisms of action that exhibits impressive single-agent activity in multiple hematologic and solid tumors. In vitro data indicate that bendamustine induces cell death as a result of both apoptosis and mitotic catastrophe, resulting in potent cell-killing activity in cancer cells that are resistant to traditional chemotherapy (alkylating and fludarabine-containing regimens). In vitro data have also demonstrated a synergistic effect with rituximab for the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas (NHL). A Phase II multicenter study (SDX-105-02) was conducted to determine the efficacy and toxicity of the combination of bendamustine with rituximab in relapsed NHL patients. Methods: The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consists of 54 patients with relapsed indolent CD20-positive B-cell or mantle cell NHL, enrolled from 22 sites in the US and Canada. Median age of the patients was 60 years (range 40–84); 59% had follicular NHL, 6% had small lymphocytic lymphoma, 4% had lymphoplasmacytoid lymphoma, 4% had marginal zone lymphoma, and 17% had mantle cell lymphoma; and 72% of all patients had Stage III/IV disease. Patients relapsed from a median of 1 prior therapy. Patients received rituximab, 375 mg/m2 IV on day 1, and bendamustine, 90 mg/m2 on days 2 and 3, every 28 days for 4–6 cycles. All patients received an additional dose of rituximab 1 week prior to the first cycle of bendamustine and 4 weeks after the last cycle. Results: Of the 54 ITT patients, 37% had prior treatment with rituximab. Forty-three patients are currently evaluable for response, as defined by the International Working Group. The overall response rate was 84%, with complete response in 21% and partial response in 63% of patients. The median duration of response has not yet been reached after a median follow up of 3.6 months. Minimal toxicity was observed. The most common nonhematologic toxicities included grade 1/2 gastrointestinal complications. The primary grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity was neutropenia (with no neutropenic fever), observed in 22% of patients. Grade 3/4 anemia and thrombocytopenia were observed in only 1 patient. No alopecia was observed. Conclusions: Bendamustine, administered in combination with rituximab, produced high objective response rates with minimal toxicity in patients with refractory indolent and mantle cell NHL, including patients that previously failed alkylating and fludarabine-containing regimens. A Phase III trial with bendamustine as a single agent in patients with rituximab-refractory indolent NHL is ongoing.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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