LR-CD: Lenalidomide combination therapy for untreated low-grade B-cell NHL.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8053 Background: Lenalidomide (LEN) is an immunomodulatory agent that has shown significant single-agent anti-lymphoma activity in patients with relapsed disease and in combination may enhance the efficacy of rituximab by various mechanisms. There is limited data on the role of LEN in combination regimens for treatment-naïve patients. This phase II single arm trial was designed to evaluate tumor response, toxicity (AE) and survival with a combination of LEN, rituximab, cyclophosphamide (CTX) and dexamethasone (DEX) (LR-CD) in symptomatic untreated patients with low grade B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Methods: Eligibility required age ≥18, ECOG PS ≤2, confirmed diagnosis of low-grade B-cell lymphoma (FL1-2, SLL, MZL or LPL/WM), measurable nodes ≥2cm or IgM ≥400mg/dL(LPL/WM), ANC ≥1400/mm3, platelets ≥100,000/mm3, creatinine ≤2mg/dL, signed informed consent and in need of therapy. Treatment consisted of IV rituximab 375mg/m2 D1, oral LEN 20mg D1-21, CTX 250mg/m2 D1, 8, 15, DEX 40mg D1, 8, 15, 22 and ASA 325 mg daily in a 28 day cycle. Treatment continued 2 cycles beyond best response (max 12). Toxicity was assessed by NCI CTCAE v3.0. Results: 28 patients have enrolled at Mayo Clinic with 25 evaluable for toxicity and 21 for response: Median age 65(43-83), 72% male, FL 24%, MZL 28%, LPL/WM 38%, and SLL 4%. Median number of cycles given was 5. Overall response in 21 patients with response data is 95% (95% CI 76-100%) with 19% CR (95% CI 5-42%), and 76% PR (confirmed and unconfirmed, 95% CI 53-92%). The ORR in 8 patients with LPL/WM with response data was 88%, all PR (95% CI 47-100%). At a median f/u of 14.7 months 96% are alive without progression. 1 death (unrelated) occurred 7.7 months after completing 12 cycles of treatment. The most common grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (37.5%), leukopenia (16.7%), anemia (12.5%) and fatigue (12.5%). Conclusions: The combination LR-CD with the novel agent LEN is feasible, well tolerated and produces high response rates in symptomatic patients with low grade B-cell NHL. Toxicities are manageable and similar to reported data of single agent LEN.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".