P1103: INMIND: A PHASE 3 STUDY OF TAFASITAMAB PLUS LENALIDOMIDE AND RITUXIMAB VERSUS PLACEBO PLUS LENALIDOMIDE AND RITUXIMAB FOR RELAPSED/REFRACTORY FOLLICULAR LYMPHOMA (FL) OR MARGINAL ZONE LYMPHOMA (MZL)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients (pts) with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) subtypes FL or MZL respond to first-line treatment but relapse is common; there is no standard treatment for pts with relapsed/refractory (R/R) FL or MZL. Tafasitamab (TAFA) is an Fc-engineered humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb) against CD19, which is broadly expressed in FL and MZL and regulates proliferation via B-cell receptor signaling. In preclinical studies, TAFA has shown activity against NHL cell lines in combination with rituximab (anti-CD20 mAb) and lenalidomide (LEN). TAFA monotherapy demonstrated promising clinical activity in a phase 2a study in pts with R/R NHL (NCT01685008), with an ORR of 29% (n/N=10/34) in pts with FL and 33% (n/N=3/9) in pts with MZL. In an ongoing phase 2, single-arm study (L-MIND, NCT02399085), TAFA + LEN followed by TAFA alone demonstrated an ORR of 57.5% (n/N=46/80) with CR of 40% (n/N=32/80) and median DOR of 34.6 mo (95% CI: 26.1–NR), in pts with R/R diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (FDA approved indication). These observations suggest a potential clinical benefit of TAFA + LEN and rituximab for pts with R/R FL or MZL. Aims: Phase 3 double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study designed to investigate whether TAFA + LEN and rituximab provides improved clinical benefit compared with LEN and rituximab in pts with R/R FL or MZL. Methods: Pts will be randomized 1:1 to receive TAFA (12 mg/kg IV on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of 28-day cycle [cycles 1–3], then days 1 and 15 [cycles 4–12]) + LEN (20 mg PO QD [or starting dose 10 mg PO QD if creatinine clearance ≥30 to <60 mL/min], days 1–21/cycle for 12 cycles) and rituximab (375 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycle 1, then day 1 of cycles 2–5), or placebo (0.9% saline solution IV) + LEN and rituximab. Stratification will include progression of disease within 24 mo (FL; yes vs no), refractoriness to prior anti-CD20 mAb therapy (FL; yes vs no), and number of prior lines of therapy (FL or MZL; <2 vs ≥2). Radiological (PET) assessment will be performed at baseline, every 12 (± 2) weeks in year 1, 16 (± 2) weeks in years 2–3, and 24 (± 3) weeks in years 4–6; additional assessment performed within 4 (± 2) weeks if progressive disease confirmed before end-of-treatment (EOT) visit. The primary study endpoint is PFS (investigator assessed [INV] by Lugano 2014 criteria) for pts with FL. Key secondary endpoints are PFS (INV) in the overall population (FL and MZL), PET-CR rate (INV) at EOT (90 days after last treatment) and OS in pts with FL. Other secondary endpoints include PET-CR rate (INV) at EOT and OS in the overall population, and ORR (INV), DOR (INV), health related quality of life, safety, and minimum residual disease-negativity rate at EOT in FL and the overall population. Inclusion criteria include age ≥18 y, histologically confirmed FL (grade 1, 2, or 3a) or MZL (nodal, splenic, or extranodal), documented R/R disease, ≥1 prior systemic anti-CD20 therapy (including anti-CD20 refractory disease), ECOG PS ≤2, adequate systemic organ function, and high tumor burden (per GELF criteria). Exclusion criteria include prior rituximab + LEN treatment, history of radiotherapy for other diseases (≥25% of bone marrow), nonhematologic malignancy, congestive heart failure (LVEF <50%), active systemic infection, known CNS lymphoma, or severe immunocompromised state. inMIND (NCT04680052, EudraCT2020-004407-13) is currently enrolling pts; planned enrollment is 528 pts with R/R FL and 60–90 pts with R/R MZL across North America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. Results: Not applicable. Summary/Conclusion: Not applicable.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".