The ECHELON-2 Trial: 5-year results of a randomized, phase III study of brentuximab vedotin with chemotherapy for CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), outcomes using frontline treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) or CHOP-like therapy are typically poor. The ECHELON-2 study demonstrated that brentuximab vedotin plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) exhibited statistically superior progression-free survival (PFS) per independent central review and improvements in overall survival versus CHOP for the frontline treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma or other CD30-positive PTCL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ECHELON-2 is a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, placebo-controlled, active-comparator phase III study. We present an exploratory update of the ECHELON-2 study, including an analysis of 5-year PFS per investigator in the intent-to-treat analysis group. RESULTS: A total of 452 patients were randomized (1 : 1) to six or eight cycles of A+CHP (N = 226) or CHOP (N = 226). At median follow-up of 47.6 months, 5-year PFS rates were 51.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 42.8% to 59.4%] with A+CHP versus 43.0% (95% CI: 35.8% to 50.0%) with CHOP (hazard ratio = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.53-0.91), and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 70.1% (95% CI: 63.3% to 75.9%) with A+CHP versus 61.0% (95% CI: 54.0% to 67.3%) with CHOP (hazard ratio = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.53-0.99). Both PFS and OS were generally consistent across key subgroups. Peripheral neuropathy was resolved or improved in 72% (84/117) of patients in the A+CHP arm and 78% (97/124) in the CHOP arm. Among patients who relapsed and subsequently received brentuximab vedotin, the objective response rate was 59% with brentuximab vedotin retreatment after A+CHP and 50% with subsequent brentuximab vedotin after CHOP. CONCLUSIONS: In this 5-year update of ECHELON-2, frontline treatment of patients with PTCL with A+CHP continues to provide clinically meaningful improvement in PFS and OS versus CHOP, with a manageable safety profile, including continued resolution or improvement of peripheral neuropathy.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".