MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and safety of idelalisib (GS-1101) in combination with bendamustine and rituximab for previously treated indolent non-Hodgkin lymphomas (iNHL).

2013· article· en· W2800681950 on OpenAlexaff
Sven de Vos, Laurie H. Sehn, Stephen P. Mulligan, Martin Dreyling, Mathias Rummel, Pier Luigi Zinzani, David M. Johnson, Shelley Evans, Roger Dansey, Wayne R. Godfrey, Myron S. Czuczman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIdelalisibBendamustineRituximabInternal medicineFollicular lymphomaLymphomaOncologyOfatumumabClinical endpointIbrutinibGastroenterologyClinical trialLeukemiaChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS8618 Background: PI3K-delta is critical for activation, proliferation and survival of B cells and plays a role in homing and retention in lymphoid tissues. PI3Kδ signaling is hyperactive in many B-cell malignancies. Idelalisib is a first-in-class, selective, oral inhibitor of PI3Kδ that reduces proliferation, enhances apoptosis, and inhibits homing and retention of malignant B cells in lymphoid tissues (Lannutti et al, 2011). Phase I trials demonstrated that idelalisib is highly active in pts with heavily pretreated iNHL: pts experienced reductions in disease-associated chemokines, profound and rapid reductions in lymphadenopathy, and durable clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile (de Vos et al, 2011). Methods: 450 pts with previously treated iNHL, who have measurable lymphadenopathy, require therapy for iNHL, have received prior anti-CD20-antibody-containing therapy and chemotherapy, and who have iNHL that is not refractory to bendamustine (B) are randomized in a 2:1 ratio into Arm A or B. In Arm A, pts receive idelalisib at 150 mg BID continuously + rituximab (R) at 375 mg/m2 every 28 days for 6 cycles + B at 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-d cycle. In Arm B, pts receive placebo BID instead of idelalisib. Stratification factors include tumor type (follicular lymphoma vs others), tumor burden (high vs low), and time since completion of last prior therapy for iNHL (<18 months vs ≥18 months). The primary endpoint is PFS, and key secondary endpoints include CR rate, ORR, lymph node response rate, and OS. This is an event-driven trial and primary endpoint evaluation will be based on independent central review. For the primary efficacy analysis, the difference in PFS between the treatment arms will be assessed in the ITT analysis set using Kaplan-Meier methods and the stratified log-rank test. The study opened for enrollment in Dec 2012 (NCT01732926). Clinical trial information: NCT01732926.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→