Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Up to 40% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have relapsed or refractory (R/R) disease after first-line treatment with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone, and outcomes are poor after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation failure. CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was a phase 1/2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab, a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor, plus brentuximab vedotin (BV) for the treatment of R/R non-Hodgkin lymphoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult patients received nivolumab plus BV in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Here, we report the results from the R/R DLBCL cohort (n = 42). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 7.7 months, the ORR was 28.6% (n = 12), and 7.1% (n = 3) of patients achieved a complete response. Median duration of response (95% CI) was 3.6 (1.2-36.5) months. All patients experienced an adverse event (AE), most commonly diarrhea (n = 20, 47.6%). Grade 3/4 and 5 AEs occurred in 24 (57.1%) and 4 (9.5%) patients, respectively. Any-grade treatment-related AEs occurred in 35 (83.3%) patients. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the efficacy data from CheckMate 436 do not support the use of nivolumab plus BV for the treatment of R/R DLBCL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".