Transcriptomic profiles and 5-year results from the randomized CLL14 study of venetoclax plus obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Data on long-term outcomes and biological drivers associated with depth of remission after BCL2 inhibition by venetoclax in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are limited. In this open-label parallel-group phase-3 study, 432 patients with previously untreated CLL were randomized (1:1) to receive either 1-year venetoclax-obinutuzumab (Ven-Obi, 216 patients) or chlorambucil-Obi (Clb-Obi, 216 patients) therapy (NCT02242942). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included minimal residual disease (MRD) and overall survival. RNA sequencing of CD19-enriched blood was conducted for exploratory post-hoc analyses. After a median follow-up of 65.4 months, PFS is significantly superior for Ven-Obi compared to Clb-Obi (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.35 [95% CI 0.26–0.46], p < 0.0001). At 5 years after randomization, the estimated PFS rate is 62.6% after Ven-Obi and 27.0% after Clb-Obi. In both arms, MRD status at the end of therapy is associated with longer PFS. MRD + ( ≥ 10−4) status is associated with increased expression of multi-drug resistance gene ABCB1 (MDR1), whereas MRD6 (< 10−6) is associated with BCL2L11 (BIM) expression. Inflammatory response pathways are enriched in MRD+ patient solely in the Ven-Obi arm. These data indicate sustained long-term efficacy of fixed-duration Ven-Obi in patients with previously untreated CLL. The distinct transcriptomic profile of MRD+ status suggests possible biological vulnerabilities.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".