Tisagenlecleucel in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients without measurable disease at infusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tisagenlecleucel demonstrated high rates of durable responses in adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL) in the JULIET trial. Most patients (92%) received bridging therapies to control disease after study entry and before tisagenlecleucel infusion. Here, we examine the efficacy and safety of tisagenlecleucel in the subset of 7 patients who achieved complete response (CR) after bridging therapy and before tisagenlecleucel infusion. Tisagenlecleucel rapidly expanded in all 7 patients, and the transgene levels were measurable for up to 2 years after infusion. After infusion, all 7 patients were still in CR at the month 3 evaluation, and 5 of 7 patients remained progression-free >12 months. Adverse events were similar to the overall JULIET population. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was reported in 4 of 7 patients (grade 2 = 2 and grade 3 = 2 using the Penn grading scale), and 1 patient experienced grade 1 neurotoxicity. No patient required tocilizumab or steroids for CRS management. These data provide preliminary evidence of tisagenlecleucel efficacy in patients with r/r DLBCL without detectable disease after bridging or salvage therapies and warrant further investigation of tisagenlecleucel as consolidative therapy in future trials. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02445248.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".