Children's Oncology Group AALL1331: Phase III Trial of Blinatumomab in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults With Low-Risk B-Cell ALL in First Relapse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Blinatumomab, a bispecific T-cell engager immunotherapy, is efficacious in relapsed/refractory B-cell ALL (B-ALL) and has a favorable toxicity profile. One aim of the Children's Oncology Group AALL1331 study was to compare survival of patients with low-risk (LR) first relapse of B-ALL treated with chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy plus blinatumomab. PATIENTS AND METHODS After block 1 reinduction, patients age 1-30 years with LR first relapse of B-ALL were randomly assigned to block 2/block 3/two continuation chemotherapy cycles/maintenance (arm C) or block 2/two cycles of continuation chemotherapy intercalated with three blinatumomab blocks/maintenance (arm D). Patients with CNS leukemia received 18 Gy cranial radiation during maintenance and intensified intrathecal chemotherapy. The primary and secondary end points were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS The 4-year DFS/OS for the 255 LR patients accrued between December 2014 and September 2019 were 61.2% ± 5.0%/90.4% ± 3.0% for blinatumomab versus 49.5% ± 5.2%/79.6% ± 4.3% for chemotherapy ( P = .089/ P = .11). For bone marrow (BM) ± extramedullary (EM) (BM ± EM; n = 174) relapses, 4-year DFS/OS were 72.7% ± 5.8%/97.1% ± 2.1% for blinatumomab versus 53.7% ± 6.7%/84.8% ± 4.8% for chemotherapy ( P = .015/ P = .020). For isolated EM (IEM; n = 81) relapses, 4-year DFS/OS were 36.6% ± 8.2%/76.5% ± 7.5% for blinatumomab versus 38.8% ± 8.0%/68.8% ± 8.6% for chemotherapy ( P = .62/ P = .53). Blinatumomab was well tolerated and patients had low adverse event rates. CONCLUSION For children, adolescents, and young adults with B-ALL in LR first relapse, there was no statistically significant difference in DFS or OS between the blinatumomab and standard chemotherapy arms overall. However, blinatumomab significantly improved DFS and OS for the two thirds of patients with BM ± EM relapse, establishing a new standard of care for this population. By contrast, similar outcomes and poor DFS for both arms were observed in the one third of patients with IEM; new treatment approaches are needed for these patients (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02101853 ).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".