MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

S102 POLATUZUMAB VEDOTIN (POLA) + OBINUTUZUMAB (G) AND LENALIDOMIDE (LEN) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH RELAPSED/REFRACTORY (R/R) FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA (FL): INTERIM ANALYSIS OF A PHASE IB/II TRIAL

2019· article· en· W2949673037 on OpenAlexaff
Pau Abrisqueta, Brad S. Kahl, L Banerjee, Andrew McMillan, Radhakrishnan Ramchandren, Fiona Miall, Javier Briones, Raúl Córdoba, Eva González‐Barca, Carlos Panizo, J. Hirata, Naomi Chang, Lisa Musick, Catherine Diefenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueHemaSphere · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineTolerabilityRegimenFollicular lymphomaInterim analysisGastroenterologyRituximabAdverse effectLymphomaClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pola‐G‐Len has the potential to enhance anti‐tumor immune response in R/R FL. Here, we report a pre‐planned interim analysis of a phase Ib/II study (NCT02600897) of Pola‐G‐Len in pts with R/R FL. Aims: To assess the safety and efficacy of induction and maintenance with Pola‐G‐Len in pts with R/R FL. Methods: This is an ongoing, open‐label, multicenter study of pts with R/R FL (excluding grade [Gr] 3b) who have received ≥1 prior anti‐CD20 antibody‐containing chemo‐immunotherapy regimen. The study comprises an initial 3+3 dose‐escalation (DE) phase (to determine the recommended phase II dose [RP2D] of both Pola and Len for the Pola‐G‐Len regimen) followed by an expansion phase to assess the RP2D of Pola and Len. Pts received induction treatment with 6x 28‐day (D) cycles (C) of: G 1000 mg IV (C1: D1, D8, D15; C2‐6: D1); Pola 1.4 mg/kg or 1.8 mg/kg (DE) or RP2D (expansion) IV (D1); and Len 10–20 mg (DE) or RP2D (expansion) PO (D1‐21). Pts with complete response (CR)/partial response (PR)/stable disease (SD) at the end of induction (EOI) received G 1000 mg (D1 every 2mo, for 24mo), and Len (10 mg, D1‐21 monthly, 12mo). Primary endpoints were C1 dose‐limiting toxicities (DLTs), safety/tolerability, CR rate at EOI (modified Lugano criteria). Results: At the interim data cut‐off (6 July 2018), 52 pts were enrolled: 9 discontinued the study (adverse events [AE], n = 3; death due to PD, n = 4; pt withdrawal, n = 1; other, n = 1). At baseline, the median pt age was 62 (range 32–87) years; 60% were male; 58% had FLIPI Gr 3–5; 79% had received ≥2 prior therapy lines; 50% were refractory to their last treatment; 17% had bulky disease (≥7 cm). Two DLTs were reported in the cohort receiving Pola 1.8 mg/kg + Len 10 mg during the DE period (Gr 4 lipase/amylase elevation; asymptomatic, resolved with supportive care; Gr 3 thrombocytopenia leading to a delay in the initiation of cycle 2). Therefore, Pola 1.4 mg/kg + Len 20 mg was selected as the RP2D for expansion. Gr ≥3 AEs were experienced by 75% of pts: neutropenia (46%), thrombocytopenia (17%), anemia (12%) and infections (12%) were the most common AEs. AEs leading to Len dose reduction or interruption occurred in 31% and 52% of pts, respectively. One Gr 5 AE was reported (septic shock after PD in pt receiving subsequent therapy). The RP2D was determined as Pola 1.4 mg/kg + Len 20 mg. Preliminary efficacy data suggest high activity, with an independent review committee‐assessed Modified Lugano response rate of 89% and a CR rate of 67% (Table). Median progression‐free survival was not reached (median follow‐up duration 8.95 mo in the efficacy‐evaluable population). image Summary/Conclusion: The safety profile of Pola‐G‐Len is consistent with known profiles of the individual drugs. Response rates at EOI with Pola‐G‐Len are promising, with high CR compared with available R/R FL treatments.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemaSphereSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207