MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with ibrutinib-rituximab in Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM): Results from iNNOVATE.

2019· article· en· W2954966588 on OpenAlexaff
Alessandra Tedeschi, Meletios Α. Dimopoulos, Judith Trotman, Ramón García‐Sánz, David MacDonald, Beatrice Mahé, Charles Herbaux, Leonard T. Heffner, Constantine S. Tam, Marzia Varettoni, Maria Lia Palomba, Jeffrey Matous, Chaim Shustik, Efstathios Kastritis, Steven P. Treon, Jianling Li, Erik Poulsen, Bernhard Hauns, Christian Buske, Véronique Leblond

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreOttawa HospitalRoyal Victoria HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabIbrutinibAnemiaInternal medicinePlaceboVisual analogue scaleWaldenstrom macroglobulinemiaQuality of life (healthcare)Refractory (planetary science)Randomized controlled trialGastroenterologySurgeryLymphomaLeukemiaChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

8018 Background: Anemia and fatigue can impair quality of life in patients (pts) with WM. Ibrutinib (ibr) as single agent or in combination with RTX is FDA-approved for WM. In pts with RTX-refractory WM, single-agent ibr induced meaningful improvements in PROs (Trotman, EHA 2017). In iNNOVATE, ibr-RTX (IR) produced higher rates of sustained hemoglobin improvement and meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo-RTX (R; Dimopoulos NEJM 2018). Here, we report detailed PRO analyses from iNNOVATE. Methods: Pts with symptomatic WM requiring therapy were randomized to daily 420 mg oral ibr or placebo, both with RTX (375 mg/m2/week IV at weeks 1–4 and 17–20). PRO measures included FACIT-Fatigue (FACIT-F), FACT-An total score (TS) and anemia subscale score (AS), and EQ-5D-5L (EuroQol Research Foundation. EQ-5D is a trade mark of the EuroQol Research Foundation) visual analog scale (VAS), and utility score (US). Results: For 150 randomized pts (n=75/arm), most common reasons for initiating therapy were fatigue (61%), constitutional symptoms (32%), and anemia (32%). Baseline PRO scores were comparable in both arms. At a median follow-up of 26.5 mo, numerically more pts showed clinically meaningful improvement in FACIT-F, TS, and AS with IR than R (Table). Median time to PRO improvement was short (1-2 mo) in both arms. At week 25, the Pearson correlation coefficients were 0.28, 0.29, and 0.26 for changes in hemoglobin levels vs changes in FACIT-F, TS and AS, respectively, in the IR arm; no meaningful correlations were observed on R. The correlation coefficients were -0.32, -0.33, -0.35 and -0.26 for changes in IgM levels vs changes in FACIT-F, TS, AS, and EQ-VAS, respectively, for IR and 0.29 and 0.35 vs FACIT-F and TS for R. Conclusions: Clinical response and improvements in anemia with IR are consistent with more pts showing clinically meaningful improvement in PROs versus R. Changes in IgM correlate with improvements in PROs. Clinical trial information: NCT02165397. [Table: see text]

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207