MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405040316 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-201189

Inferior Survival in Double Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma Eligible for Third-Line CD19 Chimeric Antigen T-Cell Therapy

2024· article· en· W4405040316 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chathuri Abeyakoon, Sita Bhella, Katrina Hueniken, Rachel Aitken, Carmel Waldron, Anca Prica, Vishal Kukreti, Robert Kridel, Abi Vijenthira, Christine I. Chen, Chloe Yang, Richard Tsang, David Hodgson, Danielle Rodin, Nauman Malik, Woodrow Wells, Michael Crump, John Kuruvilla

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCD19MedicineChimeric antigen receptorLymphomaAntigenRefractory (planetary science)OncologyImmunologyInternal medicineVirologyImmunotherapyBiologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Outcomes following CD19 chimeric antigen T-cell (CAR-T) therapy for patients (pts) with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) refractory (rf) to both an anthracycline and platinum-based therapy, referred to as double refractory (DR), are not well described. It is also unclear if these patients may be less likely to proceed to CAR-T infusion. We reviewed the outcomes of pts referred for CAR-T at our centre. Methods: Retrospective review of the CAR-T database at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from April 2020 - December 2023. Anthracycline-refractoriness was defined as pts progressing/stable disease (PD/SD) on therapy or relapsing <3 months of completing treatment (typically R-CHOP). Platinum-refractoriness was defined as PD/SD while receiving platinum-based therapy (typically R-GDP). Inclusion criteria: adults >18 years from Ontario, Canada with LBCL referred for consideration of >3-line standard of care CD19 CAR-T therapy. Outcomes included progression free survival (PFS) defined from date of cell infusion to PD/death. Overall survival (OS) defined from date of initial CAR-T consultation to death. DR cohort outcomes were compared against non-double refractory (NDR) pts (defined as pts not relapsing <3 months or no PD/SD on anthracycline-based and no PD/SD on platinum-based treatment. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to generate OS curves. Turnbull estimator was used to generate PFS curves. Results: A total of 174 pts were identified that met inclusion criteria (59: DR, 115: NDR). There were no difference in baseline characteristics (median age, sex, ECOG, stage, disease bulk, presence of MYC and BCL2/BCL6 translocation, extra-nodal involvement including CNS disease) between the 2 cohorts. Median age 61-years (range 20-83), 63% male, median prior lines 2 (range 1-3) for LBCL and 29% had an intake ECOG of >2. Histologic subtypes: de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) (67%), transformed DLBCL (28%), primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (5%). MYC and BCL2/BCL6 translocations were detected by FISH in 41/114 pts tested (35.9%). The majority had stage IV disease (53%) with extra-nodal involvement in 58%, a history of central nervous system (CNS) involvement in 6% and bulky disease (>7cm) in 43%. While no patients in the DR cohort had a prior autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), 43% of the NDR cohort had a prior ASCT. Bridging therapy (BT) was administered in 71% (n=122): radiotherapy (RT) (23%, n=39), chemotherapy (CT) (21%, n=36), RT and steroids (ST) (9%, n=16), ST only (9%, n=15), CT and ST (4%, n=7), CT, RT and ST (3%, n=5), CT and RT (2%, n=4), p=0.21. CAR-T product: axicabtagene ciloleucel 76%, tisagenlecleucel 24%. Of all 174 pts, 36 (20.6%) were unable to proceed with the intended CAR-T infusion due to ineligibility (poor ECOG or PD) (48%), pt decline (22%), active CNS disease (12%), manufacturing failure (8%) or death (6%) [missing data 4%]. The failure rate to proceed with CAR-T infusion in the DR and NDR cohorts were 30.5% versus 15.6%, p=0.036. Median follow-up for all pts was 17.5 months (range 14.7-21.1). In all pts the 12-month OS was 57% (95% CI 49-66.2%); DR 41.7% (95% CI 29.9-58%) versus NDR 65.2% (95% CI 55.6-76.6%), p=0.0046. In pts proceeding to CAR-T infusion, 12-month OS was 66.7% (95% CI 58-76.6); DR 57.2% (95% CI 42.9-76.4%) versus NDR 71% (95% CI 60.8-82.9%), p=0.23. In pts that proceeded to CAR-T infusion, 6-month PFS was 49.8% (95% CI 28.7-86.2%); DR 50.4% (95% CI 24.8-100%) versus NDR 51.7% (95% CI 29.2-91.8%), p=0.43. In pts that did not proceed to CAR-T infusion (DR: 18, NDR: 18) median OS was 2.56 months (95% CI 1.94-3.42); DR 1.94 months (95% CI 1.61-3.35) versus NDR 3.42 months (95% CI 2.56-NR), p=0.032. Univariable and multivariable analysis found DR status a predictor of inferior OS (adjusted p=0.034). Conclusion: In our analysis, DR pts had inferior OS to NDR pts, driven by higher failure rates to proceed with CAR-T infusion. The OS of DR and NDR pts proceeding to CAR-T infusion appears similar but may be influenced by sample size. Identifying DR status at time of referral as a determinate of outcome would be clinically beneficial. Approaches to bridge DR pts to CAR-T therapy and assessing outcomes of DR pts (those progressing on platinum-based BT) in second line CAR-T therapy need to be prospectively investigated.

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)0.000
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207