Characteristics of relapsed/refractory diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma patients with durable responses to maveropepimut‐S, pembrolizumab, and cyclophosphamide: Long‐term follow‐up from the SPiReL trial
Rattachement africain : ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Introduction: Patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) have an unmet medical need. The objective of this trial was to assess the efficacy and toxicities of a novel triple immunotherapy regimen-pembrolizumab, low-dose cyclophosphamide, and maveropepimut-S (MVP-S). This regimen was designed to activate tumor-specific T cells by targeting the tumor-associated antigen survivin with MVP-S and reducing two important T cell inhibitory pathways: T cell exhaustion and regulatory T cells with pembrolizumab and metronomic cyclophosphamide, respectively. Methods: This was a single-arm Phase II clinical trial in 25 participants with R/R DLBCL-SPiReL trial (NCT03349450). Results: The median overall survival was 10.1 months and a third of participants survived over 2 years. Enhanced long-term survival was associated with favorable clinical characteristics and enhanced immune reactivity, as assessed by ELISpot and ISR-immune reactive responses. The regimen was well-tolerated with minimal Grade 3-4 toxicities. Conclusion: Combination immunotherapy regimens such as this could offer a promising alternative to other treatments with significant toxicities for select patients.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Characteristics of relapsed/refractory diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma patients with durable responses to maveropepimut‐S, pembrolizumab, and cyclophosphamide: Long‐term follow‐up from the SPiReL trial
- Date Crossref
- 12/12/2024
- Éditeur
- Wiley
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.