Efficacy and toxicity of pegaspargase and calaspargase pegol in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma: Results of DFCI 11-001.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
10006 Background: DFCI ALL Consortium Protocol 11-001 assessed the efficacy and toxicity of Calaspargase pegol (SC-PEG), a novel pegylated asparaginase (ASP) formulation with longer half-life, compared with standard pegaspargase (SS-PEG). Methods: Patients (pts) aged 1-21 years with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) or lymphoblastic lymphoma (LL) were eligible. At study entry, pts were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous SS-PEG or SC-PEG, 2500 IU/m2/dose. Pts received 1 dose during the first treatment month. Beginning week 7, SS-PEG was administered every 2 weeks for 15 doses, SC-PEG every 3 weeks for 10 doses (30 weeks). Serum asparaginase activity (SAA) (considered therapeutic at ≥ 0.1 IU/mL) was assessed 4, 11, 18, and 25 days after the induction dose and before each post-induction dose. End-induction minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed in ALL pts by IGH/TCR PCR. Results: Between 2012-2015, 239 eligible pts enrolled (230 ALL, 9 LL); 120 assigned to SS-PEG, 119 to SC-PEG. After dose 1, SAA remained ≥ 0.1 IU/mL in ≥ 95% of pts on both arms through day 18. Median SAA was higher (0.319 IU/mL vs 0.056 IU/mL) and more pts had therapeutic SAA (88% vs 17%, p˂0.001) with SC-PEG vs SS-PEG 25 days after dose 1. Post-induction, median nadir SAA (NSAA) were similar ( > 1.0 IU/mL) for both arms. There was no difference in rates of ASP-allergy, pancreatitis, thrombosis, hyperbilirubinemia, osteonecrosis, or infection. Of 230 evaluable pts, 99% of SS-PEG and 95% of SC-PEG pts achieved complete remission (p = 0.12). For B ALL pts, there was no difference in frequency of high end-induction MRD (10.3% SS-PEG, 9.5% SC-PEG, p = 1.0). With 4-year median follow-up, 4-year event-free survival (EFS) (90% confidence interval) for SS-PEG was 90.2% (84.3, 93.9), 87.7% (81.5, 91.9) for SC-PEG (p = 0.78); overall survival (OS) was 95.6% (91.0, 97.9) for SS-PEG, 94.8% (90.0, 97.3) for SC-PEG (p = 0.74). Conclusions: Every 3-week SC-PEG had similar EFS, OS, safety profile, and NSAA compared with every 2-week SS-PEG. The high NSAA observed for both preparations suggest dosing strategies can be further optimized. These data informed FDA approval of SC-PEG for pediatric pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01574274.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".