Camidanlumab tesirine for relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma: a phase 2 study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Outcomes in classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) have steadily improved; however, additional therapies are needed for patients who relapse or do not respond to novel agents. Here, we report the efficacy and safety of camidanlumab tesirine (Cami), an anti-CD25 antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with relapsed/refractory cHL after brentuximab vedotin/programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor therapies from the phase 2 ADCT-301-201 study. Eligible patients were adults with cHL who had received ≥3 previous lines of systemic therapy (or ≥2 if ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant). Patients received 45 μg/kg Cami (IV, once every 3 weeks) in cycles 1 to 2, followed by 30 μg/kg IV once every 3 weeks for ≤1 year. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) per 2014 Lugano classification. Secondary end points included complete response rate (CRR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). In total, 117 patients were enrolled with a median age of 37.0 years (range, 19-87). The ORR was 70.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60.9-78.2), with a CRR of 33.3% (95% CI, 24.9-42.6). The median PFS was 9.13 months (95% CI, 5.3-15.0); median OS was not reached. Thirty-three (28.2%) patients discontinued treatment because of treatment-emergent adverse events; the most common reasons were skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (n = 10 [8.5%] patients), infections and infestations (n = 5 [4.3%]), and nervous systems disorders (n = 5 [4.3%]). Guillain-Barré-type or polyradiculopathy-type events occurred in 8 (6.8%) patients. Cami was efficacious in this heavily pretreated population; however, the efficacy was overshadowed by substantial issues with the safety profile. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04052997.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".