MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Mosunetuzumab with polatuzumab vedotin: Subgroup analyses in patients (pts) with primary refractory or early relapsed large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL).

2024· article· en· W4399481260 on OpenAlexaff
Sarit Assouline, Lihua E. Budde, Julio C. Chávez, Catherine Diefenbach, Kathleen Dorritie, Nilanjan Ghosh, Adam J. Olszewski, Izidore S. Lossos, Amitkumar Mehta, Dipenkumar Modi, Seema Naik, Stephen D. Smith, Sneha Makadia, Song Pham, Hao Wu, Connie Lee Batlevi, Iris To, Michael C. Wei, Manali Kamdar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)McGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRefractory (planetary science)OncologyInternal medicineLymphomaSubgroup analysisB-cell lymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7021 Background: The primary analysis of mosunetuzumab with polatuzumab vedotin (mosun-pola) in the Phase Ib/II study (NCT03671018) demonstrated durable responses and manageable safety in pts with relapsed or refractory (R/R), transplant-ineligible LBCL (Budde et al. Nat Med 2023). Here, we present results for primary refractory (refr) or early relapse (rel) subgroups from this study after a median follow-up of 23.9 months. Methods: Pts with R/R LBCL (diffuse LBCL not otherwise specified [NOS], high-grade B-cell lymphoma [HGBCL], transformed follicular lymphoma (FL), and FL grade 3b) and who received ≥1 prior line of therapy (including an anti-CD20 antibody) were treated with mosun-pola. Refr was defined as SD, PD, PR, or CR with relapse <3 months after first-line (1L) therapy. Rel was defined as CR with relapse ≥3 and ≤12 months after 1L therapy. The primary endpoint was best overall response rate (ORR) by IRC using Lugano 2014 response criteria. Key secondary endpoints included CR rate, duration of response (DOR), duration of CR (DOCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: As of July 6, 2023, of the 98 pts in the overall population, 45 (46%) and 27 (28%) pts had refr or rel LBCL, respectively. At baseline, the median age in the refr and rel subgroups was 68 and 70 years respectively; 23/45 pts (51%) and 6/27 pts (22%) were treated with mosun-pola as second-line, respectively. The majority of refr/rel pts had DLBCL NOS (71%; 78%) or HGBCL (24%; 19%), Ann Arbor stage III/IV (80%; 89%), elevated LDH (55%; 48%), and extranodal involvement (67%; 59%). In refr pts, the ORR was 49%, which was generally consistent with the overall population (59%); although the sample size was limited, higher responses (ORR: 74%) were observed in rel pts. Additional clinical outcomes are reported (Table). The safety profile was consistent with the overall population. Grade 3 CRS occurred in one pt in each subgroup. Treatment-related ICANS-like events occurred in 2/45 pts (4%; refr) and 3/27 pts (11%; rel). Conclusions: Mosun-pola demonstrated durable benefits in ORR and CR rates irrespective of a poor response to 1L treatment. Outcomes for pts with refr or rel LBCL are encouraging. Clinical trial information: NCT03671018 . [Table: see text]

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→