Background: AcSé Pembrolizumab is a Phase 2, open-label, single-arm, multi-cohort, multicentric study investigating the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with advanced rare cancers (NCT03012620). Here, we report the first results of Pembrolizumab in the cohort of Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma (PCNSL). Methods: Main inclusion criteria were: relapsed or refractory PCNSL after one or several lines of treatment including high dose Methotrexate based chemotherapy, pathologically confirmed diffuse large B cell lymphoma, age>18, HIV negative, concurrent steroid medication at a dose no greater than prednisone 20 mg/day or equivalent. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg IV as a 30-minute infusion on Day 1 of every 21-day cycles for a maximum of 2 years. The primary endpoint was the confirmed objective response rate according to IPCG at 84 day after the start of treatment. Secondary endpoints included best response (ORR), duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Analysis used all enrolled patients. Results: 50 patients suffering from PCNSL, including 9 primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL) were included from July, 2017 to October, 2019. Median age was 72 years (range: 43 to 83), Median PS (ECOG) was 1 (range 0-1). The median number of cycles was 4 (range 1-35). At 84 days from start of treatment, 6 patients responded (4 CR+2PR). Overall, 3 patients whose response was not assessed were considered as failures, and the rates of ORR (CR+PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD) were 26% (13/50, 8 CR + 5 PR), 10% (5/50), 58% (29/50), respectively. ORR was 29% (12/41) and 11% (1/9) in primary cerebral lymphoma and PVRL respectively. After a median follow-up of 6.7 months (range 0.2-27.4), median PFS was 2.6 months, with 6-month PFS of 29.8% and 6-month OS of 60.4%. In responders, median duration of response was estimated at 10 months (95%CI, 2.7 to 12.5). Grade III and IV toxicities related to the drug were observed in 4 patients (8%) and one patient (2%) respectively. No related toxic death was reported. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab shows moderate activity in relapsed/ refractory PCNSL with acceptable toxicity, supporting further studies evaluating its use in combination therapies. Disclosures Hoang-Xuan: BTG: Consultancy, Research Funding. Houot:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; MSD: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Schmitt:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Janssen: Honoraria. Ahle:Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Biogene: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Bories:Abbvie: Consultancy; Celgen: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Houillier:BTG: Consultancy.
Small clinical trials are trials in which the number of patients does not enable the objective of the study to be appropriately met with the usual methodological rules. This situation is common in the case of rare diseases, in paediatrics, in certain cancer pathologies or when the number of patients exposed to the treatment needs to be limited. The principal methodological problems are initially identified, and the classical methods (controlled, randomised, double-blind trial using parallel groups, crossover trial, factorial design, trial performed with several measures repeated over time, add-on design, randomised withdrawal design or early-escape design) and more uncommon methods (sequential approaches, meta-analyses, the 'N of 1' method and other methods that facilitate decision making or modelling) are then discussed. Subsequently, recommendations are made to ensure that the results obtained are not a matter of chance, and to increase the level of proof. Keywords: small trials, statistical methods, level of proof Small clinical trials are trials conducted and analysed using patient numbers lower than is required to meet the aims of the study according to the more common methodological rules. This paper therefore does not concern the standard phase I and II trials where the number of patients included in the study, although quantitatively small, is methodologically adapted to the aims of the study. It concerns all trials that aim to establish the proof of whether any given effect, be it of efficacy or tolerance, is present. PHARMACOLOGIE CLINIQUEThis situation is often the case with rare diseases, in paediatrics or in cancer treatment, when the external limitations of patient availability do not enable the recruitment of patient numbers that meet the usual assessment criteria. It is also the case when the number of patients exposed to the investigational treatment methods needs to be limited, either because of constraints regarding the particular protection of individuals (children, pregnant women), or because of the toxicity of the product (cancer treatment), or even its lack of efficacy (placebo, weak doses). The methodological issue in 'proof of concept' studies, the results of which lead to the decision on whether or not to continue developing a molecule, although based on a different context, can be related to this field.The main issue surrounding these small trials is the level of proof provided by the results of these studies, which reflects the relevance of using non-standard methods.Conducting a small trial through necessity reveals various levels of difficulties, some of which are not entirely specific to small trials, but are increased because of the reduced patient numbers. These include the following:1. The risk of not reaching a conclusion, even though there is a real difference between the therapeutic regimens being compared, because of the great variability in random fluctuations. Only a quantitatively important effect is likely to be given prominence.2. The caution necessary when extr...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.