MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214114333 · doi:10.1182/blood-2021-151837

Intensification of Chemotherapy Using a Modified BFM Backbone for Children, Adolescents and Young Adults with T-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (T-ALL) and T-Cell Lymphoblastic Lymphoma (T-LL) Identifies Highly Chemorefractory Patients Who Benefit from Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

2021· article· en· W3214114333 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Harker‐Murray, Brent L. Wood, Meenakshi Devidas, Zhiguo Chen, Tal Schechter‐Finkelstein, Robert J. Hayashi, Keith J. August, Kimberly P. Dunsmore, Michelle L. Hermiston, Terzah M. Horton, Yoav H. Messinger, Sarah Vargas, Eric S. Schafer, Maria Luisa Sulis, Stuart S. Winter, Charlotte Wood, Catherine M. Bollard, Mignon L. Loh, Stephen P. Hunger, Elizabeth A. Raetz, David T. Teachey

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMinimal residual diseaseInternal medicineCogChemotherapyGastroenterologyBone marrowOncologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The prognosis for patients (pts) with relapsed T-ALL and T-LL is dismal. The primary goal of T-ALL/T-LL treatment is to prevent relapse. In the phase 3 Children's Oncology Group (COG) clinical trial AALL1231 (NCT02112916), children, adolescents and young adults (age 1-30 years) with T-ALL and T-LL were treated with a modified augmented BFM (aBFM) backbone that used dexamethasone as the only corticosteroid and included two (rather than one) doses of pegaspargase during induction and delayed intensification. Pts were stratified as standard (SR), intermediate (IR), or very high risk (VHR), primarily based on disease response: morphology, minimal residual disease (MRD) performed by multiparameter flow cytometry at a central reference laboratory) at end of induction and consolidation (T-ALL), and radiographic response for T-LL. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive/not receive bortezomib during induction and delayed intensification (1.3mg/m 2 x 4 doses per block). VHR T-ALL pts were defined as having day 29 M3 marrow (>25% blasts) or end of consolidation (EOC) MRD >0.1%. 10-15% of T-ALL pts were predicted to be VHR based on COG AALL0434. Pts with induction failure (M3 marrow by morphology) or EOC MRD >0.1% were expected to have 4-yr event-free survival (EFS) of ~66+/-16%. Following consolidation, VHR pts received 3 BFM-based intensification blocks in lieu of interim maintenance (IM). Detectable MRD following the intensification blocks was considered an event and these pts were removed from protocol therapy. VHR ALL pts who had undetectable MRD continued protocol therapy, received delayed intensification, an IM phase with Capizzi escalating methotrexate plus pegaspargase, and maintenance. A secondary aim of AALL1231 was to compare survival in VHR T-ALL pts with EOC MRD ≥ 0.1% but undetectable MRD after intensification of chemotherapy with those who continued to have detectable MRD and were eligible for other treatment strategies, including hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). This study also analyzed outcomes for pts with M3 marrow at the end of induction. Results: AALL1231 accrued 847 pts (824 eligible and evaluable) of 1400 anticipated from 2014 until early closure. The 3-year EFS for the bortezomib randomization for the SR and IR groups has been reported previously (Teachey, et. al ASH 2020). Because only 2 of 209 T-LL pts were VHR; this report focuses on the outcomes of the 5.2% (32/615) of T-ALL pts who were VHR. In total, 25 VHR T-ALL pts were EOC MRD >0.1%, and 18 of these had MRD sent at the end of HR intensification. Of the 8 pts who became MRD undetectable and continued protocol therapy, only 2 survived (3-year overall survival [OS] 25+15.3%). In contrast, 10 pts who had detectable MRD were taken off protocol and underwent HSCT. Of these 10, only one relapsed (3-year OS 90+12.7%). The 3-year OS for the 10 pts who were M3 at Day 29 was 60.0±17.0%. As there were not enough pts to assess the impact of EOC MRD on pts who were M3 at Day 29, we assessed the impact of EOC MRD on outcomes in M2 (5-25% blasts at Day 29; n = 24) and M3 pts, which defines induction failure in other cooperative groups. M2+M3 T-ALL who were EOC MRD <0.1% (n = 15) had 3-year OS of 86.7±10.0% vs 45.5±15.0% for those with EOC MRD >0.1% (n = 12) pts. Conclusions: T-ALL pts treated on AALL1231 who are EOC MRD ≥0.1% with undetectable MRD after 3 BFM-based intensification blocks had a very poor outcome when treated with standard cytotoxic chemotherapy. In contrast, while patient numbers are small, those pts that remained MRD-positive after 3 intensification blocks and underwent HSCT had an excellent outcome. These data not only impact the recommended treatment for T-ALL pts who are induction and consolidation failures, but also support the importance of the graft-versus-leukemia (GVL) effect in refractory T-ALL. Disclosures Hayashi: Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy. August: Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hermiston: Sobi: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Bollard: Cabeletta Bio: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Catamaran Bio and Mana Therapeutics: Other: member and cofounder; SOBI: Other: DSMB. Loh: MediSix therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Raetz: Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Other: DSMB member. Teachey: BEAM Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; NeoImmune Tech: Research Funding; Sobi: Consultancy; Janssen: 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207