Biospecimen Collection
ProcedureUndergo blood sample collection
Other names: Biological Sample Collection, Biospecimen Collected, Sample Collection, Specimen Collection
NCT Number: NCT05675410
This phase III trial compares the effect of adding immunotherapy (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) to standard treatment (chemotherapy with or without radiation) to the standard treatment alone in improving survival in patients with stage I and II classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Brentuximab vedotin is in a class of medications called antibody-drug conjugates. It is made of a monoclonal antibody called brentuximab that is linked to a cytotoxic agent called vedotin. Brentuximab attaches to CD30 positive lymphoma cells in a targeted way and delivers vedotin to kill them. A monoclonal antibody is a type of protein that can bind to certain targets in the body, such as molecules that cause the body to make an immune response (antigens). Immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, such as nivolumab, may help the body's immune system attack the cancer, and may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Chemotherapy drugs such as doxorubicin hydrochloride, bleomycin sulfate, vinblastine sulfate, dacarbazine, and procarbazine hydrochloride work in different ways to stop the growth of cancer cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Cyclophosphamide is in a class of medications called alkylating agents. It works by damaging the cell's deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and may kill cancer cells. It may also lower the body's immune response. Etoposide is in a class of medications known as podophyllotoxin derivatives. It blocks a certain enzyme needed for cell division and DNA repair and may kill cancer cells. Vincristine is in a class of medications called vinca alkaloids. It works by stopping cancer cells from growing and dividing and may kill them. Prednisone is in a class of medications called corticosteroids. It is used to reduce inflammation and lower the body's immune response to help lessen the side effects of chemotherapy drugs. Radiation therapy uses high energy x-rays to kill tumor cells and shrink tumors. Adding immunotherapy to the standard treatment of chemotherapy with or without radiation may increase survival and/or fewer short-term or long-term side effects in patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma compared to the standard treatment alone.
Interested in participating?
Request Info5 year–60 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 3
Alberta Children's Hospital, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES:
I. To compare the progression-free survival (PFS) of a standard chemotherapy approach versus an immunotherapy (IO) approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) in patients with newly diagnosed early stage classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) who have a rapid early response (RER) as determined by position emission tomography post cycle 2 (PET2) after 2 cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) chemotherapy.
II. To compare the PFS of a standard chemotherapy approach versus an IO therapy approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) plus involved site radiation therapy (ISRT) in patients with newly diagnosed early stage cHL who have a slow early response (SER) as determined by PET2 after 2 cycles of ABVD chemotherapy.
SECONDARY OBJECTIVES:
I. To demonstrate non-inferiority of overall survival (OS) at 12 years of IO therapy versus standard therapy in early stage cHL patients who have a RER as determined by PET2 after 2 cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) chemotherapy.
II. To evaluate the overall survival (OS) at 12 years of IO therapy versus standard therapy in early stage cHL patients who have a SER as determined by PET2 after 2 cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) chemotherapy.
III. To demonstrate non-inferiority of overall survival (OS) at 12 years of IO therapy versus standard therapy in early stage cHL patients.
IV. To evaluate in patients with newly diagnosed early stage cHL the PFS of a standard chemotherapy approach versus an IO therapy approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) in the overall cohort, in the favorable risk cohort, and in the unfavorable risk cohort.
V. To evaluate the event-free survival (EFS) at 12 years of patients undergoing standard chemotherapy versus an IO therapy approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab).
VI. To compare the physician-reported treatment-related adverse event (AE) rates between a standard chemotherapy approach and an IO therapy approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) in patients with newly diagnosed early stage cHL.
VII. To compare patient-reported adverse events using pediatric and adult versions of Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), stratified by age groups, therapeutic arms, and receipt of radiation therapy (RT) over time.
VIII. To evaluate changes in patient-reported fatigue, cognitive functioning, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), e.g., emotional, physical, and role functioning, by treatment arm, using validated adult and pediatric measurement systems.
IX. To evaluate self-reported late morbidities (e.g., cardiovascular, pulmonary and endocrine) over time for children, adolescents and adults undergoing standard chemotherapy versus an IO therapy approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) with and without RT using measures from the St. Jude Lifetime Cohort Study (SJLIFE).
X. To evaluate fludeoxyglucose F-18 (FDG)-position emission tomography (PET) measurements of metabolic tumor burden (MTV and total lesion glycolysis [TLG]) at PET at baseline (PET1) as a predictive marker of PFS.
XI. To evaluate the associations between race/ethnicity and key outcomes including early response to therapy, PFS and OS.
EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES:
I. To evaluate the PFS of a standard chemotherapy approach versus an IO therapy approach (brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab) in patients with newly diagnosed early stage cHL across different age groups (ages 5-11 years, 12-21 years, 22-39 years, 40-60 years).
II. To bank specimens for future correlative studies. III. To assess concordance and discordance of rapid central review and local institutional review of FDG PET 5-point score (5-PS; previously referred to as Deauville score) at baseline PET1, interim PET2 and end of systemic therapy PET-end of systemic therapy (EST) SER.
IV. To assess the association between PFS and the quantitative FDG-PET/computed tomography (CT) parameters (PET MTV, TLG, delta-standardized uptake value [SUV] and PET SUV-based quantitative surrogates [qPET] of visual qualitative 5-PS) on measurements by automated measurements using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) through artificial-intelligence (AI) machine learning in the entire population.
V. To assess the agreement between quantitative FDG-PET/CT parameters obtained using AI and those based on measurements by a trained imaging physician.
VI. To compare patient-reported adverse events (via pediatric [Ped]-PRO-CTCAE and PRO-CTCAE) to provider adverse event reporting.
VII. To evaluate the association between self-reported race/ethnicity and social determinants of health.
VIII. To evaluate the associations between race/ethnicity and post-progression/post-relapse overall survival.
IX. To evaluate the completion rates of PRO and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) contact forms at 1 year off treatment for the first 450 eligible patients.
X. To collect contact information from participants for future re-contact.
OUTLINE: Patients are stratified by risk status (favorable versus unfavorable) and then all patients receive the ABVD regimen (doxorubicin hydrochloride intravenously [IV] over 3-15 minutes, bleomycin sulfate IV over at least 10 minutes, vinblastine sulfate IV, and dacarbazine IV over 15-60 minutes) on days 1 and 15 of each treatment cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days for up to 2 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients then undergo FDG-PET/CT or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and are identified as RER or SER.
Patients with a favorable risk status and RER are randomized to Arm A or Arm B. Patients with a favorable risk status and SER are randomized to Arm C or Arm D. Patients with an unfavorable risk status and RER are randomized to Arm E or Arm F. Patients with an unfavorable risk status and SER are randomized to Arm G or Arm H.
ARM A (RER, FAVORABLE): Patients receive ABVD IV for an additional 2 cycles on study. Each cycle lasts 28 days and ABVD is administered on days 1 and 15 of each cycle in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, PET-MRI, CT, and/or MRI throughout the trial. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection on trial.
ARM B (RER, FAVORABLE): Patients receive brentuximab vedotin IV over 30 minutes and nivolumab IV over 30 minutes once during each treatment cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days for up to 4 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, PET-MRI, CT, and/or MRI throughout the trial. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection on trial.
ARM C (SER, FAVORABLE): Patients receive either the eBEACOPP regimen (doxorubicin hydrochloride IV over 3-15 minutes on day 1, cyclophosphamide IV over 30-60 minutes on day 1, etoposide or etoposide phosphate IV over 2-4 hours on days 1-3, prednisone or prednisolone orally [PO] twice daily [BID] on days 1-14, procarbazine hydrochloride PO on days 1-7, bleomycin sulfate IV over at least 10 minutes on day 8, and vincristine sulfate IV on day 8 of each cycle) or the eBPDac regimen (doxorubicin hydrochloride IV 3-15 minutes on day 1, cyclophosphamide IV 30-60 minutes on day 1, etoposide or etoposide phosphate IV over 2-4 hours on days 1-3, prednisone or prednisolone PO BID on days 1-14, dacarbazine IV over 15-60 minutes on days 2 & 3, bleomycin sulfate IV over at least 10 minutes on day 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8, vincristine sulfate IV on day 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8 of each cycle). Cycles repeat every 28 days for up to 2 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Subsequently, patients undergo ISRT. Patients also undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, PET-MRI, CT, and/or MRI throughout the trial. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection on trial.
ARM D (SER, FAVORABLE): Patients receive brentuximab vedotin IV and nivolumab IV as in arm B followed by ISRT. Patients also undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, PET-MRI, CT, and/or MRI throughout the trial. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection on trial.
ARM E (RER, UNFAVORABLE): Patients receive AVD regimen (doxorubicin hydrochloride IV over 3-15 minutes, vinblastine IV, and dacarbazine IV over 15-60 minutes) on days 1 and 15 of each treatment cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days for up to 4 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, PET-MRI, CT, and/or MRI throughout the trial. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection on trial.
ARM F (RER, UNFAVORABLE): Patients receive treatment as in arm B. Patients also undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, PET-MRI, CT, and/or MRI throughout the trial. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection on trial.
ARM G (SER, UNFAVORABLE): Patients receive treatment and imaging, and may undergo blood sample collection as in arm C.
ARM H (SER, UNFAVORABLE): Patients receive treatment and imaging, and may undergo blood sample collection as in arm D.
After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 3 months for the first year, then every 6 months for the second and third year, then annually until 12 years from date of registration.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Undergo blood sample collection
Other names: Biological Sample Collection, Biospecimen Collected, Sample Collection, Specimen Collection
Given IV
Other names: Blanoxan, BleMomycine, Blenoxane, Bleo-cell, Bleo-S, Bleocin, Bleolem, Bleomycin Sulfas, Bleomycin Sulphate, Bleomycini Sulfas, Blexane, Oil Bleo
Given IV
Other names: ADC SGN-35, Adcetris, Anti-CD30 Antibody-Drug Conjugate SGN-35, Anti-CD30 Monoclonal Antibody-MMAE SGN-35, Anti-CD30 Monoclonal Antibody-Monomethylauristatin E SGN-35, cAC10-vcMMAE, SGN 35, SGN-35, SGN35
Undergo CT and/or PET-CT
Other names: CAT, CAT Scan, Computed Axial Tomography, Computerized Axial Tomography, Computerized axial tomography (procedure), Computerized Tomography, Computerized Tomography (CT) scan, CT, CT Scan, Diagnostic CAT Scan, Diagnostic CAT Scan Service Type, tomography
Given IV
Other names: (-)-Cyclophosphamide, 2H-1,3,2-Oxazaphosphorine, 2-[bis(2-chloroethyl)amino]tetrahydro-, 2-oxide, monohydrate, Asta B 518, B 518, B-518, B518, Carloxan, Ciclofosfamida, Ciclofosfamide, Cicloxal, Clafen, Claphene, CP monohydrate, CTX, CYCLO-cell, Cycloblastin, Cycloblastine, Cyclophospham, Cyclophosphamid monohydrate, Cyclophosphamide Monohydrate, Cyclophosphamidum, Cyclophosphan, Cyclophosphane, Cyclophosphanum, Cyclostin, Cyclostine, Cytophosphan, Cytophosphane, Cytoxan, Fosfaseron, Frindovyx, Genoxal, Genuxal, Ledoxina, Mitoxan, Neosar, Revimmune, Syklofosfamid, WR 138719, WR- 138719, WR-138719, WR138719
Given IV
Other names: 4-(Dimethyltriazeno)imidazole-5-carboxamide, 5-(Dimethyltriazeno)imidazole-4-carboxamide, Asercit, Biocarbazine, Dacarbazina, Dacarbazina Almirall, Dacarbazine - DTIC, Dacatic, Dakarbazin, Deticene, Detimedac, DIC, Dimethyl (triazeno) imidazolecarboxamide, Dimethyl Triazeno Imidazol Carboxamide, Dimethyl Triazeno Imidazole Carboxamide, dimethyl-triazeno-imidazole carboxamide, Dimethyl-triazeno-imidazole-carboximide, DTIC, DTIC-Dome, Fauldetic, Imidazole Carboxamide, Imidazole Carboxamide Dimethyltriazeno, WR-139007
Given IV
Other names: 5,12-Naphthacenedione, 10-[(3-amino-2,3,6-trideoxy-alpha-L-lyxo-hexopyranosyl)oxy]-7,8, 9,10-tetrahydro-6,8,11-trihydroxy-8-(hydroxyacetyl)-1-methoxy-, hydrochloride, (8S-cis)- (9CI), ADM, Adriacin, Adriamycin, Adriamycin Hydrochloride, Adriamycin PFS, Adriamycin RDF, ADRIAMYCIN, HYDROCHLORIDE, Adriamycine, Adriblastina, Adriblastine, Adrimedac, Chloridrato de Doxorrubicina, DOX, DOXO-CELL, Doxolem, Doxorubicin HCl, Doxorubicin.HCl, Doxorubin, Farmiblastina, FI 106, FI-106, FI106, hydroxydaunorubicin, Rubex
Given IV
Other names: Demethyl Epipodophyllotoxin Ethylidine Glucoside, EPEG, Lastet, Toposar, Vepesid, VP 16, VP 16-213, VP 16213, VP-16, VP-16-213, VP-16213, VP16, VP16213
Given IV
Other names: Etopophos
Undergo FDG-PET
Other names: 18FDG, FDG, Fludeoxyglucose (18F), fludeoxyglucose F 18, Fludeoxyglucose F18, Fluorine-18 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-Glucose, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
Undergo ISRT
Other names: ISRT
Undergo MRI and/or PET-MRI
Other names: Magnetic Resonance, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Magnetic resonance imaging (procedure), Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scan, Medical Imaging, Magnetic Resonance / Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, MR, MR Imaging, MRI, MRI Scan, MRIs, NMR Imaging, NMRI, Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Imaging, sMRI, Structural MRI
Given IV
Other names: ABP 206, BCD-263, BMS 936558, BMS-936558, BMS936558, CMAB819, MDX 1106, MDX-1106, MDX1106, NIVO, Nivolumab Biosimilar ABP 206, Nivolumab Biosimilar BCD-263, Nivolumab Biosimilar CMAB819, ONO 4538, ONO-4538, ONO4538, Opdivo
Undergo FDG-PET, PET, PET-CT, and/or PET-MRI
Other names: Medical Imaging, Positron Emission Tomography, PET, PET Scan, Positron emission tomography (procedure), Positron Emission Tomography Scan, Positron-Emission Tomography, PT
Given PO
Other names: (11beta)-11,17,21-Trihydroxypregna-1,4-diene-3,20-dione, .delta.1-Hydrocortisone, Adnisolone, Aprednislon, Capsoid, Cortalone, Cortisolone, Dacortin H, Decaprednil, Decortin H, Delta(1)Hydrocortisone, Delta- Cortef, Delta-Cortef, Delta-Diona, Delta-F, Delta-Phoricol, Delta1-dehydro-hydrocortisone, Deltacortril, Deltahydrocortisone, Deltasolone, Deltidrosol, Dhasolone, Di-Adreson-F, Dontisolon D, Estilsona, Fisopred, Frisolona, Gupisone, Hostacortin H, Hydeltra, Hydeltrasol, Klismacort, Kuhlprednon, Lenisolone, Lepi-Cortinolo, Linola-H N, Linola-H-Fett N, Longiprednil, Metacortandralone, Meti Derm, Meticortelone, Opredsone, Panafcortelone, Precortisyl, Pred-Clysma, Predeltilone, Predni-Coelin, Predni-Helvacort, Prednicortelone, Prednisolonum, Prelone, Prenilone, Sterane
Given PO
Other names: .delta.1-Cortisone, 1, 2-Dehydrocortisone, Adasone, Cortancyl, Dacortin, DeCortin, Decortisyl, Decorton, Delta 1-Cortisone, Delta-Dome, Deltacortene, Deltacortisone, Deltadehydrocortisone, Deltasone, Deltison, Deltra, Econosone, Lisacort, Meprosona-F, Metacortandracin, Meticorten, Ofisolona, Orasone, Panafcort, Panasol-S, Paracort, Perrigo Prednisone, PRED, Predicor, Predicorten, Prednicen-M, Prednicort, Prednidib, Prednilonga, Predniment, Prednisone Intensol, Prednisonum, Prednitone, Promifen, Rayos, Servisone, SK-Prednisone
Given PO
Other names: Benzamide, N-(1-methylethyl)-4-[(2-methylhydrazino) methyl]-, monohydrochloride (9CI), Ibenzmethyzine hydrochloride, Matulane, MIH hydrochloride, Natulan, Natulanar, Natunalar, NCI C01810, NCI-C01810, NCIC01810, p-(N'-methylhydrazinomethyl)-N-isopropylbenzamide hydrochloride, p-Toluamide, N-isopropyl-.alpha.-(2-methylhydrazino)-, monohydrochloride (8CI), PCB, PCB Hydrochloride, PCZ, Ro 4 6467/1, Ro 4-6467/1
Ancillary studies
Given IV
Other names: 29060 LE, 29060-LE, Exal, Velban, Velbe, Velsar, VINCALEUKOBLASTINE
Given IV
Other names: Kyocristine, Leurocristine Sulfate, Leurocristine, sulfate, Oncovin, Vincasar, Vincosid, Vincrex, Vincristine, sulfate
Time frame: From the time of randomization to the earliest time of disease relapse, progression, or death due to any cause, assessed up to 3 years after the randomization of the last patient or when reaching 124 events, whichever comes first
Will compare the PFS of RER patients randomized to immunotherapy (IO) therapy (brentuximab vedotin-nivolumab) against those randomized to standard therapy. PFS curves will be estimated separately by arm using Kaplan Meier methodology, and the test will be a 1-sided log-rank test between the (pooled) IO and standard arms, stratified according to the stratification factors at randomization and including all eligible and evaluable randomized patients.
Time frame: From the time of randomization to the earliest time of disease relapse, progression, or death due to any cause, assessed up to 3 years after the randomization of the last patient or when reaching 71 events, whichever comes first
Will compare PFS among SER patients randomized to IO therapy and involved-site radiation therapy against arms containing standard therapy. PFS curves will be estimated separately by arm using Kaplan Meier methodology, and the test will be a 1-sided log-rank test between the (pooled) IO and standard arms, stratified according to the stratification factors at randomization and including all eligible and evaluable randomized patients.
Time frame: Time from randomization to death due to any cause, assessed up to 12 years after the last enrollment
The non-inferiority of IO therapy to standard therapy will be tested in the randomized and eligible RER cohort using a confidence interval approach performed 12 years after the last patient not lost to follow-up has reached more than 12 years of follow-up (patients are followed up to 13 years).
Time frame: Time from randomization to death due to any cause, assessed up to 12 years after the last enrollment
Will be compared between a standard chemotherapy approach and an IO therapy approach among the SER patients.
Time frame: Time from randomization to death due to any cause, assessed at 12 years after the last enrollment
Will be based on a confidence interval approach conducted after the last patient not lost to follow-up has been followed for at least 12 years from randomization. Twelve-year OS and its corresponding 90% confidence interval will be estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method for each study arm within the entire randomized and evaluable trial population.
Time frame: Up to 12 years
Will be estimated in patients with favorable features at diagnosis. PFS and a corresponding confidence interval will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier approach. PFS will also be compared between the (pooled) IO therapy and standard therapy arms using stratified log-rank tests within each cohort.
Time frame: Up to 12 years
Will be estimated in patients with unfavorable features at diagnosis. PFS and a corresponding confidence interval will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier approach. PFS will also be compared between the (pooled) IO therapy and standard therapy arms using stratified log-rank tests within each cohort.
Time frame: Up to 12 years
PFS and a corresponding confidence interval will be estimated using the Kaplan-Meier approach. PFS will also be compared between the (pooled) IO therapy and standard therapy arms using stratified log-rank tests within each cohort.
Time frame: Time from randomization to the earliest of progression, relapse, second malignancy, or death due to any cause, assessed up to 12 years from last enrollment
Pooling IO treatment arms and standard treatment arms, EFS and corresponding confidence intervals will be estimated with the Kaplan-Meier approach for patients assigned versus (vs.) not assigned to receive radiaton therapy (RT), and compared using the log-rank test.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years from last enrollment
Will use the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer guidelines to capture immune-related AEs. Physician-reported treatment related AEs will be reported for all grades using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.0. Rates of individual toxicities with grades greater or equal to 3 will be compared between the pooled IO and standard arms using exact binomial tests. The maximum grade for each toxicity will be recorded for each patient. The rates and confidence intervals for these toxicities will be provided. Comparison of AEs will also be conducted for physician-reported treatment-related AEs between RT and non-RT patients.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years from last enrollment
Targeted patient-reported AEs will be collected at each time point using the PRO-CTCAE for patients 7 years and older. For youth (7-17 years) the Pediatric PRO-CTCAE form will be used and for those 18 years and older adult the PRO-CTCAE form will be used. For information collected by each of the above forms, the scores for each attribute together with frequency, severity and/or interference will be presented descriptively using summary statistics at each assessment time. Additionally, the worst severity and/or interference over the entire course will be summarized. The changes among main time points will be calculated. The results will be provided for the whole population and compared between subpopulations by arms and by age groups. Regression models based on longitudinal measurements can be constructed by considering the following covariates besides age groups: baseline demographics, clinical risk factors, and study arms.
Time frame: Baseline up to 1 year from end of study treatment
Will be measured by validated short forms from the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System initiatives. Domain scores will be converted to T-scores with an established standard deviation of 10 points with an average score normalized to 50 within the healthy adult population. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in these PRO measures has been accepted to be 2-3 points of the standard deviation (SD = 10) of the measure. To account for the dual primary PRO outcomes of fatigue and cognitive deficits, we will consider Bonferroni correction of p-values. Primary interests will be differences in T-scores between IO and chemotherapy arms at 1-year post completion of therapy.
Time frame: Baseline up to 1 year from end of study treatment
Will be measured by validated short forms from the Neuro-QoL initiative. Domain scores will be converted to T-scores with an established standard deviation of 10 points with an average score normalized to 50 within the healthy adult population. The MCID in these PRO measures has been accepted to be 2-3 points of the standard deviation (SD = 10) of the measure. To account for the dual primary PRO outcomes of fatigue and cognitive deficits, we will consider Bonferroni correction of p-values. Primary interests will be differences in T-scores between IO and chemotherapy arms at 1-year post completion of therapy.
Time frame: Baseline up to 1 year from end of study treatment
Domain scores will be converted to T-scores with an established standard deviation of 10 points with an average score normalized to 50 within the healthy adult population. The MCID in these PRO measures has been accepted to be 2-3 points of the standard deviation (SD = 10) of the measure. To account for the dual primary PRO outcomes of fatigue and cognitive deficits, we will consider Bonferroni correction of p-values. Primary interests will be differences in T-scores between IO and chemotherapy arms at 1-year post completion of therapy.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years from last enrollment
Will be collected by using validated measures from the St. Jude Life Cohort. The cumulative incidence of late-morbidities (e.g., cardiovascular, pulmonary and endocrine) will be compared between the standard chemotherapy and the IO therapy and among different age groups (7-14; 15-40 and 41-60) with K-sample method. The frequencies of selected organ toxicities will be compared between two treatment arms, among the three age groups and between RT and non-RT with chi-square tests.
Time frame: At baseline prior to initiation of therapy
MTV will be measured at baseline using fludeoxyglucose F-18 (FDG)-PET. The Kaplan-Meier curves of PFS will be compared between the two levels with log-rank tests.
Time frame: At baseline prior to initiation of therapy
TLG will be measured at baseline using FDG-PET. The Kaplan-Meier curves of PFS will be compared between the two levels with log-rank tests.
Time frame: After Cycle 2 of treatment (1 cycle = 28 days)
PET2 Response will be compared by race and ethnicity using Fisher exact tests.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years after last enrollment
Kaplan-Meier (K-M) curves of PFS will be generated by racial/ethnic groups (e.g., non-Hispanic white [NHW], non-Hispanic black [NHB], Hispanic). The p values for the K-M curve comparison will be obtained from log-rank tests. Associations between race/ethnicity and PFS will be evaluated with univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models by considering other covariates such as baseline clinical conditions, toxicities, SDOH, and treatment arm (standard vs. IO). Backward selection will be used to select those factors with p-value < 0.2, which will be included in final multivariable models.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years after last enrollment
K-M curves of OS will be generated by racial/ethnic groups (e.g., NHW, NHB, Hispanic). The p values for the K-M curve comparison will be obtained from log-rank tests. Associations between race/ethnicity and OS will be evaluated with univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models by considering other covariates such as baseline clinical conditions, toxicities, SDOH, and treatment arm (standard vs. IO). Backward selection will be used to select those factors with p-value < 0.2, which will be included in final multivariable models.
Time frame: Up to 12 years
Will be compared between a standard chemotherapy approach and an IO therapy approach within different age groups (ages 5-11 years, 12-21 years, 22-39 years, 40-60 years) using log-rank tests. Cox regression models will be constructed to evaluate the treatment effects for different age groups while considering the impact of other potentially prognostic variables including baseline demographics and clinical risk factors. PFS and corresponding confidence intervals for each age group will be estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method, overall and by treatment arms. In additional models, age may be evaluated as a continuous variable with potentially non-linear effects on PFS.
Time frame: At baseline, post cycle 2, and at end of systemic therapy
The concordance and discordance of 5-PS visual PET assessment from rapid central review and local institutional review will be evaluated at each of the timepoints. Will collect and retrospectively review local vs. central review concordance rates. For discordant cases, will document the differences in treatments if only local review or only central review were performed
Time frame: At baseline, post cycle 2, and at the end of therapy
The association between FDG PET parameters obtained by automated measurements using convolutional neural networks and PFS will be evaluated in this aim. The PET parameters of interest are total MTV and TLG, tumor standardized uptake value change. PET parameters will be obtained based on artificial intelligence (AI) based measurements. The effect of these PET measurements will be evaluated by Cox regression models.
Time frame: At baseline, post cycle 2, and at the end of therapy
Will compare AI derived automated quantitative FDG-PET measurement extraction and physician-based manual quantitative PET measurement with Spearman rank correlation coefficients for each extracted PET metric.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years
Will be collected by PRO-CTCAE and Ped-PRO-CTCAE. The patient reported AEs will be compared to provider reported AEs reported descriptively.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years
Will be evaluated by Chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests for sparse data. Will also calculate the area deprivation index (derived from patient-reported address and zip code to census block-group data for patients treated in the United States, and the Canadian Index of Multiple Deprivation for patients treated in Canada) and investigate its association with race/ethnicity and SDOH.
Time frame: Assessed up to 12 years
The K-M curves will be presented together with p-values via log-rank tests across the different race/ethnicity groups for each treatment arm. Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate the relationship between race/ethnicity and post-relapse OS will be constructed.
Time frame: At 1 year off treatment
Will be evaluated for the first 450 eligible participants.
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Nih
A Randomized Phase 3 Interim Response Adapted Trial Comparing Standard Therapy With Immuno-oncology Therapy for Children and Adults With Newly Diagnosed Stage I and II Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.