CD20 Mutations at the Rituximab Binding Site Are Rare and Are Not a Significant Cause of R-CHOP Resistance in Patients with De Novo Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and is not cured in 40% of patients who receive combined Rituximab + CHOP (R-CHOP) immunochemotherapy. The mechanisms of resistance to R-CHOP therapy are poorly understood. Rituximab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against the CD20 antigen on B lymphocytes. Since its addition to CHOP chemotherapy in 2001, it has reduced the mortality of patients with DLBCL by 50% in British Columbia (BC). Given this significant improvement in survival, rituximab must contribute an important role in the neoplastic B cell death. Its precise binding site on the CD20 antigen has recently been elucidated (Binder et al. Blood 2006). We hypothesized that mutations at this site could be a cause of failure to cure the DLBCL with R-CHOP. If so, detection of CD20 mutations could help risk-stratify patients and identify a group who may not benefit from the addition of rituximab to their chemotherapy regimen. Methods: We extracted DNA from 282 frozen DLBCL specimens (including 21 patients with Primary Mediastinal B cell lymphoma) at the BC Cancer Agency performed after March 2001, the date when the provincial treatment policy for advanced DLBCL was changed to R-CHOP. We amplified exon 6 of the CD20 gene which contains the rituximab epitope with the following primers: 5′-TGTAAAACGACGGCCAGTTTGGAATTCCCTCCCAGATT-3′ and 5′-CAGGAAACAGCTATGACGGATCCAGAGTTCATGCTCA-3′. In italics are the sequencing primers -21M13F and M13R. The purified 431 base pair product was bi-directionally sequenced using BigDye® Terminator v3.1 Cycle Sequencing Kit and a 3730 XL Applied Biosystems sequencer. The sequence reads where then analyzed using Polyphred/Consed. Results: 264 patients had successful sequences for this analysis. The clinical characteristics were available on only 241 pts and were as follows: median age 63 yrs (range 16–101); 129 (62%) were male; 64% IPI 0–2, 36% IPI 3–5. 197 pts received R-CHOP chemotherapy and were evaluated for outcome. The remaining patients were recorded as not receiving rituximab either because, the information was not available; they had limited-stage disease (in 2001), or were too frail to receive chemotherapy. 20% of patients relapsed or progressed after R-CHOP after a median follow-up time of 2 years (range 0.1–6.3 years). The sequencing analysis revealed 2/264 (0.008%) cases of CD20 mutations in exon 6, both in R-CHOP treated pts. One indicates a heterozygous 4 base pair (bp) deletion in nucleotides 353–356, upstream of the epitope. Clinically, this patient progressed on R-CHOP therapy. The other indicates a heterozygous 13 bp deletion at position 722 which is downstream of the epitope. This patient achieved a complete remission with R-CHOP. Interestingly, there were no Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) in this 431 base pair sequence which could also potentially impact rituximab binding at this site. Conclusions: The incidence of CD20 mutations at the rituximab binding site in 264 pts with de novo DLBCL is extremely low. Mutations at this site are therefore not a significant cause of R-CHOP resistance in this group of pts.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".