본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma.

1/5 보강
Blood 📖 저널 OA 33.7% 2025: 19/41 OA 2026: 43/153 OA 2025~2026 2026
Retraction 확인
출처

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
147 patients ≥12 years were randomized between BV/Nivo and BV/Ipi/Nivo; 132 patients are included in primary efficacy analysis.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
SCT; 36-month PFS (from SCT) was greater than 90% for both arms
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
추출되지 않음

Diefenbach C, Jegede O, Wang V, Ansell SM, Kostakoglu L, Steidl C, Natkunam Y, Scott DW, Ambinder RF, David KA, Advani RH, Bartlett NL, Robertson MJ, Thomas SP, Cohen JB, Ibrahimi S, Goyal G, Mehta-Shah N, Amengual JE, Forlenza CJ, Cole PD, Duan F, Kelly KM, Kahl BS

ℹ️ 이 논문은 무료 전문이 아직 없습니다. 코퍼스 전체의 43.6%는 무료 가능 (통계 →) · 🏥 기관 EZproxy로 시도

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

The Phase 1/2 Intergroup study E4412 (NCT01896999; ClinicalTrials.gov) investigated checkpoint blockade with nivolumab (Nivo) and ipilimumab (Ipi) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) classic Hodgkin lymphoma

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value p=0.03
  • HR 0.78
  • 추적기간 38.0 months

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Diefenbach C, Jegede O, et al. (2026). A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma.. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2025029546
MLA Diefenbach C, et al.. "A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma.." Blood, 2026.
PMID 41662628 ↗

Abstract

The Phase 1/2 Intergroup study E4412 (NCT01896999; ClinicalTrials.gov) investigated checkpoint blockade with nivolumab (Nivo) and ipilimumab (Ipi) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) classic Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) while concurrently targeting CD30+ Hodgkin Reed Sternberg cells with the antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV). 147 patients ≥12 years were randomized between BV/Nivo and BV/Ipi/Nivo; 132 patients are included in primary efficacy analysis. The primary endpoint, complete response (CR) rate, was 64.7% (52.2, 75.9) for BV/Nivo and 70.3% (57.6, 81.1) for BV/Ipi/Nivo (one-sided p=0.29). The median survival follow-up is 38.0 months (interquartile range 32.6-48.1). Progression-free survival (PFS) did not significantly differ between the two arms (HR=0.78, CI 0.39-1.57, one-sided p=0.24). Treatment-related grade 3+ toxicities in the adult cohort, excluding rash, was similar between both arms (38.5% BV/Nivo and 39.3% BV/Ipi/Nivo); there was higher frequency of grade 3 rash with BV/Ipi/Nivo (24.6%) compared to BV/Nivo (9.2%). We compared PFS by stem cell transplantation (SCT) status in a planned post-hoc comparison; 58 patients received SCT; 36-month PFS (from SCT) was greater than 90% for both arms. Sixty-six patients were alive and progression free after the first scan (disease evaluation) and did not undergo SCT. The 36-month PFS (from first scan) was 73.0% (54.5, 85.0) for BV/Ipi/Nivo compared to 45.8% (26.3, 63.4) for BV/Nivo (HR=0.45, CI 0.19-1.08, one-sided p=0.03). The study did not meet its primary endpoint of superior CR rate for the triplet, but it supports the use of checkpoint-ADC induction prior to auto SCT, and there is an intriguing signal of disease control for patients wishing to defer or avoid SCT for the triplet of BV/Ipi/Nivo.