MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Primary Results of the Health-Related Quality of Life Assessment from the Phase III Gadolin Study of Obinutuzumab Plus Bendamustine Compared with Bendamustine Alone in Patients with Rituximab-Refractory, Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

2015· article· en· W2594107028 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce D. Cheson, Peter C. Trask, John G. Gribben, Natalie Dimier, Eva Kimby, Pieternella J. Lugtenburg, Catherine Thiéblemont, Elisabeth Wassner Fritsch, Laurie H. Sehn

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBendamustineObinutuzumabMedicineRituximabInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Clinical endpointRefractory (planetary science)LymphomaPhases of clinical researchOncologySurgeryGastroenterologyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Meaningful improvement in, or maintenance of, pre-treatment health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is important for rituximab-refractory (R-ref), indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients. GADOLIN (NCT01059630) is an open-label, phase III study of bendamustine (B) with or without obinutuzumab (GA101; Gazyva/Gazyvaro; G) in patients with CD20+ R-ref, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. In GADOLIN, independent review facility (IRF)-assessed median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.9 months (mo) in the B arm and not reached in the G-B arm (HR=0.55; 95% CI, 0.40, 0.74; p=0.0001), with an acceptable safety profile. Here, we present patient-reported HRQoL data from GADOLIN. Methods The Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) questionnaire (Webster K, et al. Qual Life Res 2005;14:2103) was used to assess overall HRQoL, physical and functional well-being, and disease- and treatment-related symptoms. It was administered on day 1 of cycles 1, 3 and 5 during treatment, at the end of induction (EOI) treatment and every other month for 2-years (where non-progressing G-B patients received G maintenance and B patients were observed), and during follow-up. Time to ³6 point worsening from baseline in the FACT-Lym Trial Outcome Index (TOI) was estimated for each treatment group using a Kaplan-Meier curve. Minimally important differences at the individual subscale and total score levels were used to define the proportion of patients reporting improvement on the FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale (³3 points), TOI (³6 points), and lymphoma total score (³7 points). Results The primary study analysis was undertaken when 396 patients had been randomized (194 to G-B and 202 to B [198 treated]); median observation time was 21 mo. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. Median age was 63 years and patients had a median of two prior therapies. Questionnaire completion rates were generally good and balanced in the G-B vs B arms (91.2% vs 89.1% at baseline, 74.2% vs 69.8% at EOI, and 33.0% vs 31.2% at final follow up, respectively). Time to ³6 point worsening from baseline on the FACT-Lym TOI was 8.0 mo (95% CI, 5.8, 15.1) in the G-B arm and 4.6 mo (95% CI, 3.8, 6.4) in the B arm (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56, 0.98; Figure 1). In addition, a greater proportion of patients reported meaningful improvement on the lymphoma subscale, lymphoma TOI, and total score in the G-B arm than in the B arm throughout the study (Table 1). Conclusions G combined with B, followed by G maintenance, resulted in a greater proportion of patients reporting a meaningful improvement in HRQoL throughout the course of the study. This improvement occurred even during induction, despite similar clinical response rates. A longer time to clinically meaningful deterioration of lymphoma-related HRQoL compared with patients who received B alone was also observed. These results are consistent with the improvement in PFS and suggest that the improvement in PFS is not at the expense of an increase in treatment-related toxicity that could lead to a reduction in a patient's HRQoL. Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier Plot of FACT-Lym Trial Outcome Index ³ 6 point worsening from Baseline (ITT population) Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier Plot of FACT-Lym Trial Outcome Index ³ 6 point worsening from Baseline (ITT population) Figure 2. Summary of Definitive Improvement in FACT-Lym (ITT population) Figure 2. Summary of Definitive Improvement in FACT-Lym (ITT population) Disclosures Cheson: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy; MedImmune: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ascenta: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Obinutuzumab (GA101; Gazyva/Gazyvaro) is a CD20-directed cytolytic antibody and is indicated, in combination with chlorambucil, for the treatment of patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia). This abstract reports on bendamustine with or without obinutuzumab in patients with CD20+ R-ref, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma.. Trask:Genentech: Employment. Gribben:Janssen: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Honoraria. Dimier:Roche: Employment. Kimby:Pfizer: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jansen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lugtenburg:Mundipharma: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Thieblemont:St. Louis Hospital, Paris, France: Employment. Wassner Fritsch:Roche: Employment. Sehn:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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