MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preliminary results of a phase II randomized study (ROMULUS) of polatuzumab vedotin (PoV) or pinatuzumab vedotin (PiV) plus rituximab (RTX) in patients (Pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

2014· article· en· W2597981368 on OpenAlexaff
Franck Morschhauser, Ian W. Flinn, Ranjana H. Advani, Laurie H. Sehn, Kathryn S. Kolibaba, Oliver W. Press, Gilles Salles, Catherine Diefenbach, Hervé Tilly, Sarit Assouline, Andrew Tzong-Yow Chen, Martin Dreyling, Anton Hagenbeek, Pier Luigi Zinzani, Bruce D. Cheson, Sreenivasu Yalamanchili, Dan Lü, Akiko Chai, Yu‐Waye Chu, Jeff P. Sharman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaJewish General HospitalBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineNeutropeniaGastroenterologyRituximabAdverse effectFebrile neutropeniaRefractory (planetary science)NauseaDiarrheaLymphomaSurgeryToxicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

8519 Background: PoV and PiV, antibody drug conjugates (ADC) containing the anti-mitotic MMAE targeting CD79b (PoV) and CD22 (PiV), showed clinical activity in Phase I. The current study aims to compare PoV and PiV + RTX in R/R DLBCL and R/R follicular lymphoma (FL). Methods: Pts were randomized to receive PoV or PiV + RTX (ADC 2.4 mg/kg + RTX 375 mg/m2) every 21 days. Tumor assessments were performed every 3 months. Results: As of 8 November 2013, 58 received PoV + RTX (38 DLBCL; 20 FL), 63 PiV + RTX (42 DLBCL; 21 FL). Median prior therapies [DLBCL, 3 (1-10); FL, 2 (1-8)] were balanced between treatment arms; 46% were RTX refractory. Median treatment (tx) cycles in DLBCL: 5 for both ADC (1-15); FL: 8.5 PoV (3-15) and 6 PiV (1-13). Overall safety profiles of both regimens were similar. Tx-emergent adverse events (AE) >25%: fatigue (52%), diarrhea (42%), nausea (37%), peripheral neuropathy (PN) (32%), constipation (26%). Grade ≥ 3 AE >3%: neutropenia (21%), diarrhea (6%), dyspnea (4%), febrile neutropenia (4%), hyperglycemia (4%) and PN (4%). Serious AE reported in 36%. Thirty-eight discontinued tx for AE after median 5 doses (range 1-14), including 16 for PN. Tx delays and ADC dose reductions reported in 27% and 22%. Two of 7 deaths (sepsis, urosepsis) unrelated to NHL were attributed to PiV. Complete (CR) and partial (PR) responses, n (%) [% 95% CI] (see Table). Conclusions: PoV and PiV + RTX were generally well-tolerated with similar toxicity. Neutropenia, PN and diarrhea were principal toxicities. Similar efficacy was observed with both ADCs in heavily pretreated pts with DLBCL. The higher CR rate with PoV + RTX suggests greater clinical activity in R/R FL. Combination studies of R + PoV with chemotherapy and with ADC schedules to reduce PN are ongoing or in planning. Clinical trial information: NCT01691898. PoV (CD79b) + RTX PiV (CD22) + RTX R/R DLBCL ORR CR PR N = 37 19 (51%) [34, 68] 5 (14%) [5, 29] 14 (38%) [23, 55] N = 37 20 (54%) [37, 71] 7 (19%) [8, 35] 13 (35%) [20, 53] R/R FL ORR CR PR N = 20 12 (60%) [36, 81] 6 (30%) [12, 54] 6 (30%) [12, 54] N = 21 14 (67%) [43, 85] 1 (5%) [0.1, 24] 13 (62%) [38, 82] Pharmacokinetic profiles were similar for both ADCs across DLBCL and FL with no free MMAE accumulation.

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)0.002
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0050.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207