MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908403203 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-115593

High Vs. Low-Intensity Bridging Chemotherapy in Children with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Awaiting Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy: A Population-Based Study from Ontario, Canada

2018· article· en· W2908403203 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sumit Gupta, Sarah Alexander, Sue Zupanec, Uma H. Athale, Mylène Bassal, Ethan Edwards, Paul Gibson, Donna L. Johnston, Stacey Marjerrison, Alexander Zorzi, Johann Hitzler, Ahmed Naqvi, Angela Punnett, James A. Whitlock, Stephan A. Grupp, Shannon L. Maude, Joerg Krueger

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioLondon Health Sciences CentreMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChimeric antigen receptorPopulationChemotherapy regimenNeutropeniaRegimenContraindicationInternal medicinePediatricsCytokine release syndromeChemotherapyImmunotherapyCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T) have emerged as a promising treatment for children with relapsed/refractory acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). While CAR-T outcomes have been published, little data exist on how to manage these patients for the weeks to months between T-cell collection and CAR-T infusion. Unlike stem cell transplant (SCT), where higher burden of disease is associated with poor outcomes and is often a contraindication, successful outcomes for children with high disease burden pre-CAR-T have been demonstrated. Thus, traditional high-intensity chemotherapy for relapsed ALL that aims to minimize disease burden but carries significant morbidity may not be the best option for pre-CAR-T populations. We thus compared our population-based experience in using high vs. low-intensity chemotherapy regimens to bridge patients in terms of toxicity, inpatient days, and success in reaching CAR-T infusion. Methods: The Hospital for Sick Children (Sickkids) is the provincial referral centre for cellular therapy for children in Ontario, Canada. All Ontario children referred to Sickkids between 2014-2018 for first T-cell collection with intent to proceed to CAR-T therapy were included and followed until CAR-T infusion, decision to pursue alternative therapy, or death. Bridging regimen details were collected and classified as low vs. high intensity based on whether such therapy was likely associated with >7 days of neutropenia. Disease and outcome variables were compared between high vs. low intensity regimens using Chi squared, Fisher's exact, or Wilcoxon tests. Results: The cohort included 32 patients with a median age of 9.7 years at the time of first T-cell collection [interquartile range (IQR) 6.0-12.3]. The median number of previous relapses was 2 (IQR 1-2), 14 (44.0%) had undergone prior SCT, and 4 (12.5%) had Down syndrome. The vast majority of patients (28, 87.5%) were successfully bridged to receive CAR-T therapy with a median time to infusion of 81 days (IQR 60-105). Two patients experienced manufacturing failure and pursued SCT instead, 1 died of toxicity, and 1 was still awaiting infusion at the end of the study period. Low-intensity bridging regimens were used following collection for 19 (59.4%) patients, most often based on low-dose intravenous methotrexate, 3-drug induction (vincristine/steroids/asparaginase), or maintenance therapy. The most common high-intensity regimens included cyclophosphamide/etoposide, high dose cytarabine, or 4-drug induction (vincristine/steroids/asparaginase/anthracycline). Patients receiving high-intensity therapy did not seem to have more aggressive disease prior to starting bridging treatment (as indicated by peripheral blasts, number of previous relapses, prior SCT) that would have justified choosing high-intensity treatments. Patients receiving initial high-intensity regimens were however more likely to have been collected in first half of the study period (Table 1). Patients receiving initial high-intensity regimens also developed more microbiologically documented infections and experienced a greater number of inpatient days (Table 1). Excluding patients experiencing manufacturing failure or still awaiting CAR-T at the end of the study period, the likelihood of receiving CAR-T also did not vary [high-intensity regimen - 11/12 (91.7%) vs. low-intensity regimen - 17/17 (100%); p=0.41]. Conclusions: We demonstrate in our population-based cohort of heavily pre-treated and high-risk patients that initial low-intensity chemotherapy had a very high likelihood of successfully bridging children to CAR-T infusion. Low-intensity bridging regimens were associated with lower rates of toxicity and higher quality of life as indicated by fewer inpatient days. Low-intensity regimens should be considered the first line option in this population. Disclosures Grupp: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Adaptimmune: Consultancy; University of Pennsylvania: Patents & Royalties; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Maude:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207