Rituximab Maintenance for Two Years in Previously Untreated Follicular Lymphoma: No Difference in Outcome between Patients Receiving Treatment at Two Month Versus Three Month Interval
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rituximab maintenance (MR) improves progression free survival (PFS) in patients with follicular lymphoma after induction treatment. The PRIMA trial demonstrated a PFS benefit using a maintenance protocol in which rituximab was administered every 2 months in previously untreated follicular lymphoma (Salles et al, Lancet 2011). The EORTC 20981 trial showed a similar benefit in relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma using a schedule in which rituximab was administered every 3 months (Van Oers et al. JCO 2010). These maintenance protocols have not been formally compared. This multi-center retrospective study compares the clinical outcome of patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma receiving MR at 3 month intervals versus 2 month intervals. A total of 112 patients completed MR for follicular lymphoma after first line induction between 2005 and 2015: 71 (63%) received MR at 3 month interval and 41 (37%) at a 2 month interval. The GELF criteria (Brice et als, JCO, 1997) were met in 41 (59%) patients in the 3 month interval group and in 33 (79%) patients in the 2 month interval group. All patients received an induction regimen containing rituximab and 78% received R-CVP. Median follow up time was 59 months and was significantly longer in the 3 month interval group with 70 months compared to 40 months in the 2 month interval group (p The administration of MR at an interval of 3 months compared to 2 months does not seem to adversely affect the survival outcomes of patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma. The administration of rituximab every 3 months instead of every 2 months would decrease the cost and potentially the infectious complications of MR. Although this study has limitations, such as a limited number of patients and a disparity between the two groups regarding the presence of GELF criteria, it provides preliminary data supporting the interest of further investigation of the administration of MR every 3 months in previously untreated follicular lymphoma. Disclosures Fleury: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Doucet: Abbvie: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Speaker; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".