Glofitamab step-up dosing (SUD): Complete response rates in updated efficacy data in heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients (pts).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
7519 Background: Glofitamab (RG6026), a T-cell-engaging, bispecific, full-length antibody, allows bivalent binding to CD20 (B-cells), and monovalent binding to CD3 (T-cells). In NP30179 (NCT03075696), an ongoing multicenter, Phase I dose-escalation and expansion study, 0.6–25mg glofitamab fixed-dosing with obinutuzumab pretreatment (Gpt), showed high, durable complete responses and manageable safety in heavily pretreated R/R NHL (Dickinson, et al. EHA 2020). Glofitamab SUD, in addition to Gpt, allowed dose escalation up to 30mg to maximize efficacy, while mitigating cytokine release syndrome (CRS) (Hutchings, et al. JCO 2021). We present updated efficacy data from glofitamab monotherapy SUD cohorts. Methods: Gpt (1000mg) was given to pts 7 days pre-glofitamab initial dose. Intravenous SUD of glofitamab was given on Day (D) 1 and 8 of Cycle (C) 1 and then at the target dose from C2D1 (2.5/10/16mg or 2.5/10/30mg); treatment continued for up to 12 cycles, every 21 days. Response rates were based on the Lugano criteria (Cheson, et al. JCO 2014). Results: Fifty-two pts received glofitamab SUD; 17 and 35 pts received 2.5/10/16mg and 2.5/10/30mg, respectively. Twenty-eight pts (53.8%) had aggressive NHL (aNHL) and 24 pts had indolent NHL (iNHL). Pts had a median age of 68 (44–85) years and received a median of 3 (1–12) prior lines of therapy. Forty (76.9%) and 38 (73.1%) pts were refractory to their most recent and any prior CD20 therapy, respectively. After a median follow-up of 6.3 months, an updated efficacy analysis was conducted on December 1, 2020. For pts with aNHL (N = 28), the best overall response (OR) and complete metabolic response (CMR) rates were 64.3% and 57.1%, respectively; a trend of improved response was observed with increased target dose, with a CMR rate of 71.4% at 2.5/10/30mg (N = 14). Notably, 4/5 pts (80%) with mantle cell lymphoma (2.5/10/16mg, n = 2; 2.5/10/30mg, n = 2) had CMR. For aNHL, 13/16 CMRs are ongoing, with 8 CMRs lasting > 3 months. For pts with iNHL (N = 24), OR and CMR rates were 79.2% and 70.8%, respectively; 14/17 CMRs are ongoing, with 10 CMRs lasting > 3 months. As of August 3, 2020, common adverse events (52 pts) were CRS (63.5%), neutropenia (38.5%), and pyrexia (32.7%). CRS was mostly confined to C1: 24/50 pts had CRS after 2.5mg; 20/49 pts after 10mg; 2/16 and 8/32 pts had CRS after 16 and 30mg (C2D1), respectively. Grade [Gr] 1 and 2 CRS was reported in 18 (34.6%) and 12 (23%) pts, respectively; 3 pts had Gr 3 CRS; none had Gr 4/5 events (ASTCT 2019). Updated data, including biomarker data on baseline CD20 expression and CD8 levels in the tumor, will be presented. Conclusions: Updated data for glofitamab monotherapy SUD show higher preliminary response rates than previously reported in pts with R/R NHL who have failed multiple lines of therapy. CRS was mostly manageable, of low grade, and confined to the first cycle of treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT03075696.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".