Enduring undetectable MRD and updated outcomes in relapsed/refractory CLL after fixed-duration venetoclax-rituximab
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The MURANO trial (A Study to Evaluate the Benefit of Venetoclax Plus Rituximab Compared With Bendamustine Plus Rituximab in Participants With Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia [CLL]; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier #NCT02005471) reported superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with venetoclax-rituximab (VenR) vs bendamustine-rituximab (BR) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL. Patients were randomized to 2 years of VenR (n = 194; rituximab for the first 6 months) or 6 months of BR (n = 195). Although undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD) was achieved more often with VenR, the long-term implications of uMRD with this fixed-duration, chemotherapy-free regimen have not been explored. We report MRD kinetics and updated outcomes with 5 years' follow-up. Survival benefits with VenR vs BR were sustained (median PFS [95% confidence interval]: 53.6 [48.4, 57.0] vs 17.0 [15.5, 21.7] months, respectively, P < .0001; 5-year OS [95% confidence interval]: 82.1% [76.4, 87.8] vs 62.2% [54.8, 69.6], P < .0001). VenR was superior to BR, regardless of cytogenetic category. VenR-treated patients with uMRD at end of treatment (EOT; n = 83) had superior OS vs those with high-MRD+ (n = 12): 3-year post-EOT survival rates were 95.3% vs 72.9% (P = .039). In those with uMRD at EOT, median time to MRD conversion was 19.4 months. Of 47 patients with documented MRD conversion, 19 developed progressive disease (PD); median time from conversion to PD was 25.2 months. A population-based logistic growth model indicated slower MRD median doubling time post-EOT with VenR (93 days) vs BR (53 days; P = 1.2 × 10-7). No new safety signals were identified. Sustained survival, uMRD benefits, and durable responses support 2-year fixed-duration VenR treatment in R/R CLL.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".