MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Final Results of the BP22333 Study Demonstrate Non-Inferior Pharmacokinetics (PK) and Safety of Subcutaneous (SC) Administration of Rituximab Compared with Intravenous (IV) Administration As Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Follicular Lymphoma (FL)

2012· article· en· W2592462257 on OpenAlexaff
Antonio Salar, Irit Avivi, Jean-François Larouche, Andrea Janíková, Juliana Pereira, Mike Brewster, Olivier Catalani, Christine McIntyre, Pakeeza Sayyed, Andrew Haynes

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRituximabMedicineTolerabilityDosingPharmacokineticsCD20Internal medicineFollicular lymphomaConfidence intervalOncologyAdverse effectGastroenterologyUrologySurgeryLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 1641 Rituximab has proven efficacy and tolerability for treating B-cell malignancies. IV rituximab administration can take several hours, consuming considerable healthcare resources. A SC rituximab formulation has been developed which may shorten administration time, increase patient (pt) convenience, and potentially reduce IV administration-associated costs. Rituximab efficacy depends on CD20 binding, and Ctrough rituximab levels reflect rituximab exposure throughout the therapy cycle; therefore, achieving a non-inferior Ctrough level with SC dosing is expected to provide comparable efficacy to IV dosing. BP22333 (NCT00930514) is a two-stage phase Ib study assessing PK and tolerability of SC vs IV maintenance rituximab in pts with first-line or relapsed FL. Stage 1 dose-finding results (Salar et al, ASH 2010, abstract 2858; Salar et al, EHA 2012, abstract 0794) identified a fixed dose of 1400 mg for formal Ctrough non-inferiority testing in Stage 2. We report Stage 2 data. The Stage 2 objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of simulated Ctrough of rituximab SC and IV, using a non-inferiority test with a lower boundary of 0.8 for the 90% confidence interval (CI). Secondary endpoints include SC vs IV rituximab safety and area under the serum concentration-time curve. Eligible pts (N = 157) were aged ≥18 years with an ECOG performance status of ≤ 2, and histologically confirmed CD20-positive grade 1, 2, or 3a FL requiring treatment. Eligible pts must have achieved a complete or partial response following IV rituximab-based induction therapy for FL and have received ≥1 cycle of IV rituximab maintenance within 16 weeks of completing induction. Pts (N = 154) were randomized 1:1 to receive SC rituximab (1400 mg) or IV rituximab (375 mg/m2) for their remaining maintenance cycles, stratified by 2-monthly (q2m) vs 3-monthly (q3m) regimen. Study arms were balanced for age, sex, body surface area, FL grade at diagnosis, induction therapy and number of maintenance doses prior to study entry. As of May 11, 2012, 13 SC pts had withdrawn (7 for progressive disease [PD], 4 for AEs, 1 at investigator's decision, 1 for ineligibility) and 17 IV pts had withdrawn (10 for PD, 4 for AEs, 3 for ineligibility). Median treatment duration on-study was 14.8 months (range, 0–19) in the SC arm and 13.8 months (range, 0–19) in the IV arm. The primary endpoint of the study was met. Geometric mean Ctrough,SC:Ctrough,IV ratios were 1.24 and 1.12, respectively, for q2m and q3m, and lower limits of the two-sided 90% CI (1.02 and 0.86, respectively) exceeded the protocol-specified non-inferiority limit (Ctrough,SC:Ctrough,IV ratio of 0.8). Therefore, 1400 mg SC rituximab was concluded to be non-inferior to 375 mg/m2 IV rituximab administration. AE incidence and intensity were generally balanced; 79% of pts in each arm experienced AEs. Serious AEs were observed in 12% and 14% of pts in the SC and IV arms, respectively; none occurred in > 1 pt in either arm. Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 18% and 17% of pts in the SC and IV arms, respectively; the only grade 3/4 AEs occurring in > 1 pt in either arm were neutropenia (2 pts in each arm) and arthralgia (2 pts in the IV arm). Administration-related reactions (ARRs) were the most frequent AE and had a higher incidence in the SC arm (reported in 31% of SC vs 4% of IV pts). ARRs were mostly local reactions; the most common in the SC arm were: erythema (13%), injection site erythema (5%), and myalgia (5%). Further safety data will be presented. PK data for SC and IV rituximab administration demonstrate non-inferiority of 1400 mg rituximab SC administration to that of the approved IV rituximab maintenance regimen for both q2m and q3m schedules. The overall AE profiles were similar for SC and IV rituximab administration, with the exception of local ARRs, which had a higher incidence in the SC arm compared with the IV arm, reflecting the expected change in the ARR profile with SC administration. Induction and maintenance therapy using the 1400 mg SC rituximab dose is being assessed in the phase III BO22334 study. Disclosures: Salar: Roche: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Subcutaneous (SC) administration of rituximab as maintenance therapy in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL). Larouche:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Brewster:Roche: Employment, Equity Ownership. Catalani:Roche: Employment, Equity Ownership. McIntyre:Roche: Employment. Sayyed:Roche: Employment. Haynes:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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