MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase 3 trial of subcutaneous epcoritamab + R-CHOP versus R-CHOP in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): EPCORE DLBCL-2.

2023· article· en· W4379330790 on OpenAlexaff
Laurie H. Sehn, Martine E.D. Chamuleau, Georg Lenz, Michael Roost Clausen, Corinne Haïoun, Koji Izutsu, Andrew John John Davies, Jun Zhu, Toshiko Oki, Edith Szafer‐Glusman, Rebekah Conlon, David Ipe, Brian Elliott, Jun Wu, Gilles Salles

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsSpinal Cord Injury BCUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaInternal medicineVincristineCytokine release syndromeCHOPOncologyPrednisonePhases of clinical researchInternational Prognostic IndexCyclophosphamideLymphomaGastroenterologyDiscontinuationCD20Clinical trialChemotherapyCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS7592 Background: In pts with newly diagnosed DLBCL, standard treatment with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) has a 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate of 67.0%, 58.4%, and 45.8% for International Prognostic Index (IPI) 2, 3, and 4–5, respectively (Ruppert et al, Blood 2020). Epcoritamab is a subcutaneously administered, bispecific antibody that binds CD3 on T cells and CD20 on B cells, inducing potent and selective T-cell–mediated killing of malignant CD20+ B cells (Hutchings et al, Lancet 2021). Epcoritamab monotherapy demonstrated deep and durable responses (overall response rate [ORR], 63%; complete response rate, 39%) and was generally well tolerated in pts with relapsed/refractory (R/R) aggressive, large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) (Thieblemont et al, J Clin Oncol 2022). Results from an ongoing phase 1/2 study in high-risk pts with newly diagnosed DLBCL (EPCORE NHL-2 arm 1; NCT04663347) show that epcoritamab + R-CHOP has promising efficacy and a manageable safety profile in high-risk pts with IPI 3–5. Among efficacy-evaluable pts (n = 31), ORR was 100% and complete metabolic response (CMR) was 77%; cytokine release syndrome (CRS) events (n = 17/33; 52%) were mostly low-grade, had predictable timing, and did not lead to treatment discontinuation (Falchi et al, ASCO 2022, abstract 7523). These encouraging data support further evaluation of epcoritamab + R-CHOP for the treatment of newly diagnosed DLBCL. Methods: This phase 3, global, multicenter, open-label study (NCT05578976) evaluates the efficacy and safety of epcoritamab + R-CHOP in adults newly diagnosed with one of the following CD20+ DLBCL (de novo or transformed from follicular lymphoma [FL]): 1) DLBCL, not otherwise specified (NOS); 2) high-grade B-cell lymphoma with MYC and BCL-2 and/or BCL-6 rearrangement; 3) T-cell/histiocyte–rich LBCL; 4) Epstein-Barr virus–positive DLBCL, NOS; or 5) FL grade 3b. Other key eligibility criteria include IPI ≥2 (pts with IPI 2 not to exceed ~30% of total pts), ECOG PS 0–2, and ≥1 measurable disease site. Approximately 900 pts will be randomized 2:1 to either epcoritamab + R-CHOP (6 cycles, followed by 2 cycles of epcoritamab) or R-CHOP (6 cycles, followed by 2 cycles of rituximab). The primary efficacy endpoint is PFS in pts with IPI 3–5 (based on IRC assessment per Lugano criteria). The secondary efficacy endpoints are PFS in pts with IPI 2–5, event-free survival, CMR, overall survival, and minimal residual disease negativity. Safety endpoints include incidence and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs of special interest (CRS, immune cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome, and clinical tumor lysis syndrome. Enrollment began in January 2023 globally. Clinical trial information: NCT04663347 , NCT05578976 .

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207