ArticleHaematologica2021
Venetoclax plus bendamustine-rituximab or bendamustine-obinutuzumab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: final results of a phase 1b study (GO28440).
Article in Haematologica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 12 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Venetoclax (Ven), an orally administered, potent BCL-2 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) in combination with rituximab (R) or obinutuzumab (G). Our aim was to investigate the addition of bendamustine (B) to these Ven-containing regimens in relapsed/refractory (R/R) or first-line (1L) CLL. This multi-arm, non-randomized, open-label, phase 1b study was designed to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety/tolerability of Ven with BR/BG, with 3+3 dose-escalation followed by safety expansion. Patients received Ven (schedule A) or BR/BG first (schedule B) to compare safety and determine dose/schedule for expansion. Six Ven-BR/-BG cycles were to be administered, then Ven monotherapy until disease progression (R/R) or fixed-duration 1-year treatment (1L). Overall, 33 R/R and 50 1L patients were enrolled. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed (doses 100-400-mg), and the MTD was not reached. Safety was similar between schedules; no tumour lysis syndrome (TLS) occurred during dose-finding. Schedule B and Ven 400-mg were chosen for expansion. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicity was neutropenia: R/R 64%, 1L Ven-BR 85%, 1L Ven-BG 55%. Grade 3-4 infection rate was: R/R 27%, 1L Ven-BR 0%, 1L Ven-BG 27%. During expansion, one clinical and two laboratory TLS cases occurred. Fewer than half the patients completed six combination therapy cycles with all study drugs; rates of bendamustine discontinuation were high. Overall response rate was 91% in R/R and 100% in 1L patients (16/49 1L patients received Ven for >1 year). In conclusion, addition of bendamustine to Ven-R/-G increased toxicity without apparent efficacy benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.