MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overall survival by <i>IDH2</i> mutant allele (R140 or R172) in patients with late-stage mutant-<i>IDH2</i> relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia treated with enasidenib or conventional care regimens in the phase 3 IDHENTIFY trial.

2022· article· en· W4281912306 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane de Botton, Alberto Risueño, Andre C. Schuh, Bob Löwenberg, Hee‐Je Kim, Paresh Vyas, Andrew H. Wei, Eytan M. Stein, Hartmut Döhner, Amir T. Fathi, Courtney D. DiNardo, Patricia Martin Regueira, Lilia Taningco, Iryna Bluemmert, Xin Yu, Wendy L. See, Maroof Hasan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIDH2MedicineInternal medicineMyeloid leukemiaClinical endpointRefractory (planetary science)GastroenterologyOncologyRandomized controlled trialIDH1MutantGeneBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7005 Background: IDH2 gene mutations (m IDH2) occur in up to ̃20% of patients (pts) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), most commonly as R140Q (in ̃75% of cases) or R172K (̃25%) point mutations. The functional effects and prognostic relevance of m IDH2-R140 and m IDH2-R172 can vary (Papaemmanuil 2016). In the randomized, phase 3 IDHENTIFY trial, enasidenib (ENA), an oral mIDH2 inhibitor, did not significantly improve overall survival (OS) vs conventional care regimens (CCR) as salvage treatment (Tx) for older pts with m IDH2 relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML in ITT analysis, but a trend for improved OS with ENA was detected in pts with IDH2-R172 mutations. We further investigated OS and correlative biomarkers in IDHENTIFY pt subgroups defined by m IDH2 variant (R140/R172). Methods: This open-label trial (NCT02577406) enrolled pts ≥ 60 years of age who had received 2 or 3 prior AML Tx. Pts were preselected to a CCR (azacitidine, intermediate- or low-dose Ara-C, or supportive care), and were then randomized 1:1 to ENA 100 mg/d or CCR in 28d cycles. Co-occurring gene mutations were identified by targeted next-generation sequencing (37-gene panel) of bone marrow mononuclear cell (BMMC) DNA. Total 2-HG levels were determined by LC/MS. Results: Of 319 pts enrolled, 88 pts (28%; 43 ENA, 45 CCR) had m IDH2-R172 and 229 (72%; 115 ENA, 114 CCR) had m IDH2-R140. Median baseline (BL) 2-HG levels were similar between Tx arms and m IDH2 variant subgroups, as were IDH2 variant allele frequencies. Pts with m IDH2-R172 had fewer median BL co-mutations (4 [range 2–8]) than did pts with m IDH2-R140 (5 [1–11]) ( P < 0.0001). The most frequently co-occurring mutations were SRSF2 and RUNX1 in the R140 cohort (59% each) and DNMT3A in the R172 cohort (57%). Compared with the R172 cohort, the R140 group was enriched with SRSF2, FLT3 (-ITD/-TKD), NPM1, RUNX1, and JAK2 mutations, whereas DNMT3A and TP53 mutations were more common in the R172 group. In Cox multivariate analysis including m IDH2 variant (R140/R172), DNMT3A mutation status, and number of gene mutations at BL, m IDH2-R172 was significantly ( P = 0.04) correlated with improved OS (vs. R140) in the ENA arm, whereas the number of BL gene mutations was significantly ( P < 0.01) associated with OS in the CCR arm. Median OS in the R172 subgroup was 14.6 mo with ENA vs 7.8 mo with CCR (HR, 0.59 [95%CI 0.35-0.98]; P = 0.039) and 1-yr survival rates were 62% and 30%, respectively. In m IDH2-R140 pts, median OS was 5.7 mo in both Tx arms (0.93 [0.70-1.24]; P = 0.61), and 1-year survival rates were 29% and 25% with ENA and CCR, respectively. Conclusions: Mutational burden and co-mutational profiles differed between pts with m IDH2-R140 and m IDH2-R172 R/R AML. ENA improved survival outcomes for pts with IDH2-R172 mutations, with median OS and 1-year survival rate approximately double those in the CCR arm. Clinical trial information: NCT02577406.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207