MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411453748 · doi:10.1080/14796694.2025.2513219

Plain language summary of the ECHELON-3 study: brentuximab vedotin combination treatment in people with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

2025· article· en· W4411453748 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy L. Bartlett, Uwe Hahn, Won Seog Kim, Isabelle Fleury, Kamel Laribi, Juan Bergua, Krimo Bouabdallah, Nicholas Forward, Fontanet Bijou, David R. Macdonald, Craig A. Portell, Hervé Ghesquières, Grzegorz S. Nowakowski, Christopher A. Yasenchak, Monica Patterson, Linda Ho, Evelyn Rustia, Michelle A. Fanale, Fei Jie, Jeong‐Ah Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersBeiGeneSanofiAstraZenecaPfizer
KeywordsBrentuximab vedotinMedicineOncologyInternal medicineLymphomaDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaMedical physicsHodgkin lymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plain Language SummaryWhat is this summary about?This is a summary of the results of a study called ECHELON-3. This study compared a brentuximab vedotin (BV) combination (BV, lenalidomide, and rituximab) and a placebo combination (placebo, lenalidomide, and rituximab). This analysis looked at how well the medicines worked and their side effects in people with a type of cancer called diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) that had relapsed or was refractory after previous treatments. The ECHELON-3 study is ongoing, and the results summarized here are not final.What were the results?In this study, 230 people with relapsed or refractory DLBCL were randomly assigned to receive either the BV combination (112 people) or the placebo combination (118 people).How long did they live?At least half of the people who received the BV combination lived for 13.8 months compared with 8.5 months for people who received the placebo combination. This benefit was seen in different subgroups of people, including people at high risk and people who had tried other advanced treatments.Did their tumors shrink or become undetectable on scans?More people who received the BV combination (72 out of 112, or 64%) had their cancer shrink or become undetectable (was not visible) on scans than people who received the placebo combination (49 out of 118, or 42%). Cancer became undetectable on scans for 45 out of 112 people (40%) who received the BV combination and 22 out of 118 people (19%) who received the placebo combination.Did they have any side effects from the medicines?Most people who received either the BV combination (109 out of 112, or 97%) or the placebo combination (113 out of 116, or 97%) experienced side effects. However, most side effects in the study were manageable.What do the results mean?This study showed that compared with people who took the placebo combination, people who took the BV combination lived longer; more people who took the BV combination had their cancer shrink or become undetectable on scans. For both treatments, side effects were similar and generally manageable.This is an abstract of the Plain Language Summary of Publication article.View the full Plain Language Summary PDF of this article to read the full-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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture OncologySame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207