Five-Year Analysis of the JULIET Trial of Tisagenlecleucel in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Large B-Cell Lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report the 5-year analysis of tisagenlecleucel in 115 infused patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) from the single-arm, open-label, multicenter, global, phase II JULIET trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02445248), with a median follow-up of 74.3 months. The median duration of response (DOR) was not reached; the 60-month, relapse-free probability was 61% among responders. Higher relapse-free probability (DOR >70%) was observed in females and those with less than two baseline International Prognostic Index risk factors or with baseline stage I/II disease. The estimated probability of progression-free survival at 60 months was 28%. The probability of overall survival (OS) at 60 months was 32% for all infused patients and 56% for those achieving complete or partial response. Baseline characteristics associated with achieving a response at any time after infusion included relapsed versus refractory disease, one versus two or more bridging regimens, lactate dehydrogenase level ≤upper limit of normal (ULN) versus >ULN, and C-reactive protein levels <15 mg/L versus >15 mg/L. Baseline characteristics associated with long-term OS included lactate dehydrogenase ≤ULN and C-reactive protein <15 mg/L. No new safety signals or secondary T-cell malignancies were reported. These findings continue to support the curative potential of tisagenlecleucel in a subset of patients with r/r LBCL.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".