MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623453597 · doi:10.1002/hon.2439_188

IBRUTINIB IN ASSOCIATION WITH R‐DHAP/OX FOR PATIENTS WITH RELAPSED/REFRACTORY B‐CELL LYMPHOMA: PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE BIBLOS PHASE IB LYSA STUDY

2017· article· en· W2623453597 on OpenAlexaff
Christophe Bonnet, Thierry Lamy, Christophe Fruchart, K. Gunzer, Thomas Gastinne, Fabrice Jardin, Lionel Karlin, Roch Houot, Jehan Dupuis, Hervé Tilly, Gilles Salles

Bibliographic record

VenueHematological Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineDHAPGastroenterologyNeutropeniaMantle cell lymphomaFebrile neutropeniaNauseaMucositisCytarabineRashIbrutinibRituximabSurgeryOncologyLymphomaToxicityChemotherapyLeukemiaChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Ibrutinib (Ibru), an inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, is efficient, in monotherapy, for treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) mantle cells lymphoma and R/R chronic lymphocytic leukemia (Wang, 2013). The safety and activity of Ibru in combination with R-CHOP or R-Benda has also been evaluated (Younes, 2014; Maddocks 2015). We conducted a phase Ib study to assess of the safety of ibru associated with R-DHAP or R-DHAOx for patients (pts), with R/R B-cell lymphoma candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Methods: Pts were planned to receive 3 cycles, every 21 days, of rituximab, dexamethasone, cytarabine and cisplatin (R-DHAP) or oxaliplatin (R-DHAOx) in association with escalating doses of ibru given on D1 to D21. Dose level (DL) 1 was 420 mg/day. The dose-variation scheme followed a “3 + 3” design (DL-1: 280 mg/day; DL2: 560 mg/day). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTdefined as: non-hematological toxicity grade (Gr) 3–4 excluding alopecia, diarrhea and/or nausea/vomiting and/or fatigue/asthenia for <7 days, any Gr ≥ 2 hemorrhagic events, any Gr ≥ 1 intracranial hemorrhage and any Gr ≥ 4 hematological toxicity >7 days) were considered during the first cycle. DLT. Results: Between 05/14 and 07/15, 25 pts were treated (R-DHAP: 13, 1 non evaluable; R-DHAOx: 12). In the DL1 cohort, DLTs related to ibru were observed in 3/6 pts receiving R-DHAOx (Gr3 cutaneous eruption, Gr3 febrile neutropenia and infection, Gr4 thrombocytopenia) and in 3/6 pts receiving R-DHAP (Gr4 cutaneous eruption, Gr4 thrombocytopenia and Gr4 sepsis). A total of 13 pts were treated at DL-1 with 1 pt experiencing DLT in each cohort (R-DHAP group: Gr4 thrombocytopenia and Gr4 gastric hemorrhage, Gr3 atrial fibrillation; R-DHAOx group: Gr3 epigastric pain). 6 (50%) pts treated with ibru at the dose of 420 mg and 10 (77%) of those treated at the dose of 280 mg received more than 80% of the planned dose. All pts experienced ≥1 adverse events (AE) and Gr3–4 hematological AEs (neutropenia: 17 pts; thrombocytopenia: 25 pts). Overall, 3 pts presented serious hemorrhagic AE, 4 developed cutaneous eruptions. 1 died (cardiac toxicityassessed as unrelated to ibru). Ibru was discontinued in 9 pts (7 for toxicities or DLTs, and 2 due to pt's decision). Response to treatment was evaluable in 16 pts (64%) and14 responded to the treatment (8 (50%) CR and 6 (37%) PR. Stem cells were harvested in 16 pts and all of them underwent ASCT (CD34+ cells >3.0 × 106/kg in 94% of the collected pts after 1 sole apheresis). Conclusions: Preliminary results show that the R-DHAP/Ox plus ibru. (given from D1 to D21) regimen led to several DLTs. Since underdosing (280 mg) might not optimal to achieve an optimal response, a new dose escalation phase with ibru given only from D5 to D18 with pharmacokinetics analyses was performed. The results of this will be presented. Expansion phase will open for inclusion in a few weeks. Keywords: autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT); B-cell lymphoma; ibrutinib.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHematological OncologySame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207