MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379375856 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2301665

Survival with Axicabtagene Ciloleucel in Large B-Cell Lymphoma

2023· article· en· W4379375856 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie University
FundersGilead Sciences
KeywordsMedicineChemoimmunotherapyHazard ratioInternal medicineConfidence intervalLymphomaOncologyTransplantationAutologous stem-cell transplantationSurvival analysisSurgeryRituximab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In an analysis of the primary outcome of this phase 3 trial, patients with early relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma who received axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, as second-line treatment had significantly longer event-free survival than those who received standard care. Data were needed on longer-term outcomes. METHODS: In this trial, we randomly assigned patients with early relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma in a 1:1 ratio to receive either axi-cel or standard care (two to three cycles of chemoimmunotherapy followed by high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients who had a response). The primary outcome was event-free survival, and key secondary outcomes were response and overall survival. Here, we report the results of the prespecified overall survival analysis at 5 years after the first patient underwent randomization. RESULTS: A total of 359 patients underwent randomization to receive axi-cel (180 patients) or standard care (179 patients). At a median follow-up of 47.2 months, death had been reported in 82 patients in the axi-cel group and in 95 patients in the standard-care group. The median overall survival was not reached in the axi-cel group and was 31.1 months in the standard-care group; the estimated 4-year overall survival was 54.6% and 46.0%, respectively (hazard ratio for death, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 0.98; P = 0.03 by stratified two-sided log-rank test). This increased survival with axi-cel was observed in the intention-to-treat population, which included 74% of patients with primary refractory disease and other high-risk features. The median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 14.7 months in the axi-cel group and 3.7 months in the standard-care group, with estimated 4-year percentages of 41.8% and 24.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.67). No new treatment-related deaths had occurred since the primary analysis of event-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: At a median follow-up of 47.2 months, axi-cel as second-line treatment for patients with early relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma resulted in significantly longer overall survival than standard care. (Funded by Kite; ZUMA-7 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03391466.).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.281 · 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