MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4310127708 · doi:10.1182/blood-2022-159594

Mosunetuzumab with Polatuzumab Vedotin Is Effective and Has a Manageable Safety Profile in Patients Aged <65 and ≥65 Years with Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) and ≥1 Prior Therapy: Subgroup Analysis of a Phase Ib/II Study

2022· article· en· W4310127708 on OpenAlexaff
Adam J. Olszewski, Lihua E. Budde, Julio Chavez, Nilanjan Ghosh, Manali Kamdar, Izidore S. Lossos, Catherine Diefenbach, Waleed Sabry, Kathleen Dorritie, Ling‐Yuh Huw, Song Pham, Ting Jia, Hao Wu, Iris To, Michael C. Wei, Sarit Assouline

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General HospitalSaskatchewan Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaMedicineInternal medicineLymphomaOncologyRefractory (planetary science)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Treatment decision-making for elderly DLBCL patients (pts) is challenging. Advancing age is associated with an increase in the incidence of comorbidity and vulnerability to treatment-related toxicities (Thieblemont & Coiffier. J Clin Oncol 2007). Mosunetuzumab (M) is a CD20xCD3 T-cell engaging bispecific monoclonal antibody (Ab) that redirects T cells to eliminate malignant B cells. The Phase Ib/II GO40516 study (NCT03671018) is evaluating M in combination with the anti-CD79b antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin (Pola; M-Pola) in pts with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). In the ongoing Phase II part of the study, M-Pola showed an acceptable safety profile with promising activity in pts with R/R B-NHL (Budde et al. ASH 2021). Here, we present a subgroup analysis of the efficacy and safety of M-Pola in pts aged <65 and ≥65 years with R/R aggressive B-NHL from the Phase Ib dose-escalation and Phase II dose-expansion cohorts. Methods: All pts in this analysis had DLBCL (including transformed follicular lymphoma and follicular lymphoma grade [Gr] IIIB), an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0-2, and ≥1 prior line of therapy, including an anti-CD20 Ab. Treatment cycles were 21 days. Pola (1.8mg/kg intravenous [IV] infusion) was given on Day (D)1 of Cycle (C)1-6. M (IV infusion) was given with step-up dosing during C1 to mitigate cytokine release syndrome (CRS), and the recommended Phase II dose was used in the Phase II dose-expansion cohort (1mg on C1D1, 2mg on C1D8, 60mg on C1D15 and C2D1, and 30mg on D1 of C3-8). Pts with stable disease or a partial response at the end of C8 could continue M for a total of 17 cycles, while pts with a complete response (CR) discontinued M after C8. In the Phase II expansion cohort, mandatory hospitalization was not required for M administration. Response was assessed by investigators using Lugano 2014 criteria (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol 2014). CRS events were reported using American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy criteria (Lee et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2019). Results: As of March 15, 2021, with a median follow-up of 5.3 months (range: 0.7-23.7 months), 60 pts with R/R DLBCL had received M-Pola: 24 (40%) were aged <65 years and 36 (60%) were aged ≥65 years. At study entry, for pts aged ≥65 years, the median age was 73 years (range: 65-83), 53% had ECOG PS 1 and 8% had PS 2, 50% had International Prognostic Index 3-5, 81% had Ann Arbor stage III/IV disease, and 81% and 72% were refractory to a prior anti-CD20 Ab and to last prior therapy, respectively. There were more pts <65 years than pts ≥65 years with high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH; 63% vs 44%, respectively), with ≥3 prior lines of therapy (67% vs 56%), and refractory to CAR T-cell therapy (38% vs 25%; Table). Compared with younger pts, those aged ≥65 years had a numerically higher ORR (72% [95% CI: 55-86] vs 54% [95% CI: 33-75]) and CR rate (56% [95% CI: 38-72] vs 38% [95% CI: 19-59]). The rate of Gr 3-4 adverse events (AEs) was lower in pts ≥65 years than in those <65 years (39% vs 58%, respectively), with fewer neutropenia events occurring (14% vs 33%); the rate of serious AEs of any Gr was similar (39% vs 33%). Five pts ≥65 years discontinued M and/or Pola due to treatment-related AEs compared with one pt <65 years. The rate of CRS was comparable in pts aged ≥65 and <65 years (17% vs 21%), all CRS events were low-Gr (≥65 vs <65 years: Gr 1, 14% vs 21%; Gr 2, 3% vs 0%), and all CRS events resolved. Rates of serious AEs of infection were comparable in pts aged ≥65 and <65 years (11% vs 17%, respectively). Rates of peripheral neuropathy were 42% in pts aged ≥65 years vs 21% in pts aged <65 years, with most events Gr1-2 (≥65 vs <65 years: 1 vs 2 Gr 3 events). After the first M-Pola dose, pharmacodynamic changes in interferon-α and T-cell activation in peripheral blood were similar across age groups. Conclusions: M-Pola is effective and has a manageable safety profile in pts with heavily pretreated DLBCL, including older pts who may have more comorbidities and fewer treatment options, such as those who are poor candidates for CAR T-cell therapy. Numerically higher ORR and CR rates were seen in pts aged ≥65 years, although longer follow-up is required. Comparable rates of CRS and serious AEs were observed across age groups. Enrollment in the Phase II study with no mandatory hospitalization is ongoing. Figure 1View largeDownload PPTFigure 1View largeDownload PPT Close modal

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→