Polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and rituximab or obinutuzumab in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: a phase Ib/II study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common type of indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Despite treatment advances that have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) FL, many patients still die from progressive disease or treatment-related toxicities. In the phase Ib/II GO29365 study (clinicaltrials.gov 02257567), the safety and efficacy of polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and rituximab (Pola-BR) versus bendamustine and rituximab (BR) alone, and polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and obinutuzumab (Pola-BG) as a single-arm cohort were evaluated in patients with R/R FL. Following the phase Ib safety run-in, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Pola-BR or BR alone in the phase II stage; a separate non-randomized Pola-BG cohort was examined in the phase Ib/II expansion stage. Primary endpoints included safety and tolerability (phase Ib) and positron emission tomography complete response (PET-CR) rate by independent review committee (phase II). Overall, 112 patients were enrolled (phase Ib safety run-in: Pola-BR, N=6; phase II randomized cohort: Pola-BR, N=39; BR, N=41; phase Ib/II expansion cohort: Pola-BG, N=26). PET-CR rates were 66.7% (phase Ib safety run-in, Pola-BR); 69.2% (phase II randomized, Pola-BR); 63.4% (phase II randomized, BR); and 65.4% (phase Ib/II expansion Pola-BG). There was a higher occurrence of cytopenias with Pola-BR and Pola-BG than with BR; serious adverse events were more frequent with Pola-BR (61.4%) and Pola-BG (46.2%) than with BR (29.3%). Overall, this analysis does not demonstrate a benefit of adding Pola to BR or BG regimens for patients with R/R FL.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".