Obinutuzumab Versus Rituximab in Transplant Eligible Untreated MCL Patients, a Matching Comparison between the Lyma and Lyma-101 Trials

Aim: Obinutuzumab (O) and Rituximab (R) have never been compared in a prospective randomized trial in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The LYMA-101 trial (NCT02896582) investigated the Obinutuzumab-DHAP (O-DHAP) regimen followed by autologous stem cell transplant (O-BEAM, ASCT) plus O maintenance (OM) in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBlood Vol. 142; no. Supplement 1; p. 980
Main Authors Sarkozy, Clementine, Callanan, Mary, Thieblemont, Catherine, Oberic, Lucie, Burroni, Barbara, Bouabdallah, Krimo, Damaj, Gandhi Laurent, Tessoulin, Benoit, Ribrag, Vincent, Houot, Roch, Morschhauser, Franck, Cacheux, Victoria, Delwail, Vincent, Safar, Violaine, Gressin, Remy, Cheminant, Morgane, Hermine, Olivier, Macintyre, Elizabeth A., Le Gouill, Steven
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Elsevier Inc 02.11.2023
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0006-4971
1528-0020
DOI10.1182/blood-2023-174416

Cover

Abstract Aim: Obinutuzumab (O) and Rituximab (R) have never been compared in a prospective randomized trial in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The LYMA-101 trial (NCT02896582) investigated the Obinutuzumab-DHAP (O-DHAP) regimen followed by autologous stem cell transplant (O-BEAM, ASCT) plus O maintenance (OM) in transplant eligible patients <66y with untreated MCL (Le Gouill et al, Lancet Hem 2020). The LYMA trial (NCT00921414) used the same regimen with Rituximab instead of Obinutuzumab (Le Gouill et al, NEJM 2017). Herein, we report the long-term outcome of patients enrolled in the LYMA-101 trial and used a propensity score matching (PSM) approach to allow a comparison with patients treated in the LYMA trial (i.e. O versus R group matched comparison). Method: LYMA (n=299 pts, of whom 120 received R Maintenance, RM) is a phase III prospective trial with a median follow-up of 7.5 years (7.4-7.7) from inclusion (Sarkozy et al, ASCO 2023) that randomized, after ASCT, 240 pts between observation and RM. LYMA-101 (n=86) is a prospective single arm phase 2 trial with a median FU of 5.1y (5-5.25) at the time of the present analysis. We first compared minimal residual disease (MRD) at end of induction (EOI), assessed in both trial with quantitative PCR of clonal immunoglobulin gene and used PSM based on clinical characteristics at inclusion (Sex, Ann Arbor stage, MIPI score, B symptoms, blastoid variant, bulky disease) to balance patients' discrepancies between LYMA-101 and LYMA. To compare PFS and OS from inclusion of patients treated with R versus O based regimen, half of the non-randomized LYMA patients (29 out of 58) were randomly reattributed to the RM arm to create an intention to treat RM (RM-ITT) arm including 149 pts (29 non-randomized and 120 randomized) subsequently matched with the 86 LYMA-101 pts. Balance between populations was checked using standardized mean differences (SMD). Results: Eighty-five LYMA-101 pts received the first course of O-DHAP (1 withdrew consent before treatment), 81 (95.3%) completed the 4 cycles and 73 (85.9%) underwent ASCT followed by OM in 69 (81.2%). The estimated 5y PFS and OS since inclusion were 83.4% (95%CI: 73.5-89.8%) and 86.9% (95%CI: 77.6-92.5%) respectively. At EOI, ORR were similar in both studies (89.6% versus 91.8% in LYMA versus LYMA-101 respectively), but within responders, pts treated in LYMA-101 (O-DHAP) had a more frequent MRD negativity than pts treated in LYMA (R-DHAP) both in bone marrow (BM, 82.1% versus 65.3% MRD negativity in O vs R group, Chi2 p=0.011) and blood (95.5% versus 79.2% of MRD negativity in O vs R group, Chi2 p=0.002). These results were confirmed using the propensity score matched populations, with a more frequent MRD negativity in the O versus R group in BM (82.1% vs 63.4%, Chi-2, p=0.01) and blood (95.5% vs 72.9%, Chi-2, p<0.001). To compare PFS and OS since induction, a PSM was performed using the 149 patients treated in the R-group with an RM-ITT and the 85 patients in the O group, resulting in 2 sets of 82 patients with comparable characteristics at inclusion. From treatment initiation, patients treated with O presented a prolonged PFS (p=0.029, figure 1A) and OS (p=0.039, figure 1B) compared to those treated with R, with an estimated 5-year PFS of 82.8% versus 66.6% (HR 1.99, IC95 1.05-3.76) and OS of 86.4% versus 71.4% (HR 2.08, IC95 1.01-4.16) with O and R based regimen respectively. Finally, 37/120 (30.8%) patients in LYMA and 23/69 (33.3%) in LYMA-101 prematurely stopped R and OM respectively (with a similar mean maintenance duration of 29 and 29.4m with R and OM respectively). Reason for maintenance discontinuation were adverse events in 15 cases in R group (12.5% of the population) versus 14 cases in O group (20% of the population), progression or death in 10 (8.3%) versus 3 (4.3%) cases in the R versus O group respectively. Causes of death were comparable in O and R groups, the most common being lymphoma (42% in O and 53% in R group). Infectious deaths in the O group (N=3) were all COVID related (3/12 deaths, 25%), whereas in the R group (LYMA being conducted before the pandemic), 8 deaths were related to infection (8/97 deaths, 8%, including 1 infectious death out of 22 deaths during RM, 5%). Conclusion: O-DHAP followed by OM post ASCT provide prolonged PFS and OS in young patients with MCL. O-based therapy in MCL induce deeper response with increased MRD negativity and seems to outperform R-based therapy in term of PFS and OS, without any significant excess of toxicity. Sarkozy:Incyte Bioscience: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; AbbVie: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Congress fees; Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Prelude Therapeutics: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Lilly: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Takeda: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Thieblemont:Paris University, Assistance Publique, hopitaux de Paris (APHP): Current Employment; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Kyte, Gilead, Novartis, BMS, Abbvie, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Amgen: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Hospira: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses. Oberic:incyte: Honoraria; gilead: Honoraria; roche: Honoraria; AZD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Damaj:Takeda, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, and Thermo Fisher: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Role; Takeda, AbbVie and Pfizer: Other: Travel and Accommodation Expenses. Tessoulin:Gilead: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria. Ribrag:Incyte: Consultancy; NanoString: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Argenx: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Houot:Kite/Gilead, Novartis, Incyte, Janssen, MSD, Takeda, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria; Kite/Gilead, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene, ADC Therapeutics, Incyte, Miltenyi: Consultancy. Morschhauser:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, AbbVie, BMS, Genmab, Gilead, Novartis: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Gilead, AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Safar:janssen: Honoraria. Cheminant:AstraZeneca: Other: Travel accomodations and Meeting inscription; Innate Pharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding. Hermine:AB science: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Research Funding; Inatherys: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Research Funding; BMS, Roche, Blueprint, Alexion: Research Funding. [Display omitted]
AbstractList Aim: Obinutuzumab (O) and Rituximab (R) have never been compared in a prospective randomized trial in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The LYMA-101 trial (NCT02896582) investigated the Obinutuzumab-DHAP (O-DHAP) regimen followed by autologous stem cell transplant (O-BEAM, ASCT) plus O maintenance (OM) in transplant eligible patients <66y with untreated MCL (Le Gouill et al, Lancet Hem 2020). The LYMA trial (NCT00921414) used the same regimen with Rituximab instead of Obinutuzumab (Le Gouill et al, NEJM 2017). Herein, we report the long-term outcome of patients enrolled in the LYMA-101 trial and used a propensity score matching (PSM) approach to allow a comparison with patients treated in the LYMA trial (i.e. O versus R group matched comparison). Method: LYMA (n=299 pts, of whom 120 received R Maintenance, RM) is a phase III prospective trial with a median follow-up of 7.5 years (7.4-7.7) from inclusion (Sarkozy et al, ASCO 2023) that randomized, after ASCT, 240 pts between observation and RM. LYMA-101 (n=86) is a prospective single arm phase 2 trial with a median FU of 5.1y (5-5.25) at the time of the present analysis. We first compared minimal residual disease (MRD) at end of induction (EOI), assessed in both trial with quantitative PCR of clonal immunoglobulin gene and used PSM based on clinical characteristics at inclusion (Sex, Ann Arbor stage, MIPI score, B symptoms, blastoid variant, bulky disease) to balance patients' discrepancies between LYMA-101 and LYMA. To compare PFS and OS from inclusion of patients treated with R versus O based regimen, half of the non-randomized LYMA patients (29 out of 58) were randomly reattributed to the RM arm to create an intention to treat RM (RM-ITT) arm including 149 pts (29 non-randomized and 120 randomized) subsequently matched with the 86 LYMA-101 pts. Balance between populations was checked using standardized mean differences (SMD). Results: Eighty-five LYMA-101 pts received the first course of O-DHAP (1 withdrew consent before treatment), 81 (95.3%) completed the 4 cycles and 73 (85.9%) underwent ASCT followed by OM in 69 (81.2%). The estimated 5y PFS and OS since inclusion were 83.4% (95%CI: 73.5-89.8%) and 86.9% (95%CI: 77.6-92.5%) respectively. At EOI, ORR were similar in both studies (89.6% versus 91.8% in LYMA versus LYMA-101 respectively), but within responders, pts treated in LYMA-101 (O-DHAP) had a more frequent MRD negativity than pts treated in LYMA (R-DHAP) both in bone marrow (BM, 82.1% versus 65.3% MRD negativity in O vs R group, Chi2 p=0.011) and blood (95.5% versus 79.2% of MRD negativity in O vs R group, Chi2 p=0.002). These results were confirmed using the propensity score matched populations, with a more frequent MRD negativity in the O versus R group in BM (82.1% vs 63.4%, Chi-2, p=0.01) and blood (95.5% vs 72.9%, Chi-2, p<0.001). To compare PFS and OS since induction, a PSM was performed using the 149 patients treated in the R-group with an RM-ITT and the 85 patients in the O group, resulting in 2 sets of 82 patients with comparable characteristics at inclusion. From treatment initiation, patients treated with O presented a prolonged PFS (p=0.029, figure 1A) and OS (p=0.039, figure 1B) compared to those treated with R, with an estimated 5-year PFS of 82.8% versus 66.6% (HR 1.99, IC95 1.05-3.76) and OS of 86.4% versus 71.4% (HR 2.08, IC95 1.01-4.16) with O and R based regimen respectively. Finally, 37/120 (30.8%) patients in LYMA and 23/69 (33.3%) in LYMA-101 prematurely stopped R and OM respectively (with a similar mean maintenance duration of 29 and 29.4m with R and OM respectively). Reason for maintenance discontinuation were adverse events in 15 cases in R group (12.5% of the population) versus 14 cases in O group (20% of the population), progression or death in 10 (8.3%) versus 3 (4.3%) cases in the R versus O group respectively. Causes of death were comparable in O and R groups, the most common being lymphoma (42% in O and 53% in R group). Infectious deaths in the O group (N=3) were all COVID related (3/12 deaths, 25%), whereas in the R group (LYMA being conducted before the pandemic), 8 deaths were related to infection (8/97 deaths, 8%, including 1 infectious death out of 22 deaths during RM, 5%). Conclusion: O-DHAP followed by OM post ASCT provide prolonged PFS and OS in young patients with MCL. O-based therapy in MCL induce deeper response with increased MRD negativity and seems to outperform R-based therapy in term of PFS and OS, without any significant excess of toxicity.
Aim: Obinutuzumab (O) and Rituximab (R) have never been compared in a prospective randomized trial in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The LYMA-101 trial (NCT02896582) investigated the Obinutuzumab-DHAP (O-DHAP) regimen followed by autologous stem cell transplant (O-BEAM, ASCT) plus O maintenance (OM) in transplant eligible patients <66y with untreated MCL (Le Gouill et al, Lancet Hem 2020). The LYMA trial (NCT00921414) used the same regimen with Rituximab instead of Obinutuzumab (Le Gouill et al, NEJM 2017). Herein, we report the long-term outcome of patients enrolled in the LYMA-101 trial and used a propensity score matching (PSM) approach to allow a comparison with patients treated in the LYMA trial (i.e. O versus R group matched comparison). Method: LYMA (n=299 pts, of whom 120 received R Maintenance, RM) is a phase III prospective trial with a median follow-up of 7.5 years (7.4-7.7) from inclusion (Sarkozy et al, ASCO 2023) that randomized, after ASCT, 240 pts between observation and RM. LYMA-101 (n=86) is a prospective single arm phase 2 trial with a median FU of 5.1y (5-5.25) at the time of the present analysis. We first compared minimal residual disease (MRD) at end of induction (EOI), assessed in both trial with quantitative PCR of clonal immunoglobulin gene and used PSM based on clinical characteristics at inclusion (Sex, Ann Arbor stage, MIPI score, B symptoms, blastoid variant, bulky disease) to balance patients' discrepancies between LYMA-101 and LYMA. To compare PFS and OS from inclusion of patients treated with R versus O based regimen, half of the non-randomized LYMA patients (29 out of 58) were randomly reattributed to the RM arm to create an intention to treat RM (RM-ITT) arm including 149 pts (29 non-randomized and 120 randomized) subsequently matched with the 86 LYMA-101 pts. Balance between populations was checked using standardized mean differences (SMD). Results: Eighty-five LYMA-101 pts received the first course of O-DHAP (1 withdrew consent before treatment), 81 (95.3%) completed the 4 cycles and 73 (85.9%) underwent ASCT followed by OM in 69 (81.2%). The estimated 5y PFS and OS since inclusion were 83.4% (95%CI: 73.5-89.8%) and 86.9% (95%CI: 77.6-92.5%) respectively. At EOI, ORR were similar in both studies (89.6% versus 91.8% in LYMA versus LYMA-101 respectively), but within responders, pts treated in LYMA-101 (O-DHAP) had a more frequent MRD negativity than pts treated in LYMA (R-DHAP) both in bone marrow (BM, 82.1% versus 65.3% MRD negativity in O vs R group, Chi2 p=0.011) and blood (95.5% versus 79.2% of MRD negativity in O vs R group, Chi2 p=0.002). These results were confirmed using the propensity score matched populations, with a more frequent MRD negativity in the O versus R group in BM (82.1% vs 63.4%, Chi-2, p=0.01) and blood (95.5% vs 72.9%, Chi-2, p<0.001). To compare PFS and OS since induction, a PSM was performed using the 149 patients treated in the R-group with an RM-ITT and the 85 patients in the O group, resulting in 2 sets of 82 patients with comparable characteristics at inclusion. From treatment initiation, patients treated with O presented a prolonged PFS (p=0.029, figure 1A) and OS (p=0.039, figure 1B) compared to those treated with R, with an estimated 5-year PFS of 82.8% versus 66.6% (HR 1.99, IC95 1.05-3.76) and OS of 86.4% versus 71.4% (HR 2.08, IC95 1.01-4.16) with O and R based regimen respectively. Finally, 37/120 (30.8%) patients in LYMA and 23/69 (33.3%) in LYMA-101 prematurely stopped R and OM respectively (with a similar mean maintenance duration of 29 and 29.4m with R and OM respectively). Reason for maintenance discontinuation were adverse events in 15 cases in R group (12.5% of the population) versus 14 cases in O group (20% of the population), progression or death in 10 (8.3%) versus 3 (4.3%) cases in the R versus O group respectively. Causes of death were comparable in O and R groups, the most common being lymphoma (42% in O and 53% in R group). Infectious deaths in the O group (N=3) were all COVID related (3/12 deaths, 25%), whereas in the R group (LYMA being conducted before the pandemic), 8 deaths were related to infection (8/97 deaths, 8%, including 1 infectious death out of 22 deaths during RM, 5%). Conclusion: O-DHAP followed by OM post ASCT provide prolonged PFS and OS in young patients with MCL. O-based therapy in MCL induce deeper response with increased MRD negativity and seems to outperform R-based therapy in term of PFS and OS, without any significant excess of toxicity. Sarkozy:Incyte Bioscience: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; AbbVie: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Congress fees; Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Prelude Therapeutics: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; Lilly: Honoraria; Gilead: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Takeda: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Thieblemont:Paris University, Assistance Publique, hopitaux de Paris (APHP): Current Employment; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Kyte, Gilead, Novartis, BMS, Abbvie, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Amgen: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellectis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Hospira: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses. Oberic:incyte: Honoraria; gilead: Honoraria; roche: Honoraria; AZD: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Damaj:Takeda, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, and Thermo Fisher: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Role; Takeda, AbbVie and Pfizer: Other: Travel and Accommodation Expenses. Tessoulin:Gilead: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria. Ribrag:Incyte: Consultancy; NanoString: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Argenx: Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Houot:Kite/Gilead, Novartis, Incyte, Janssen, MSD, Takeda, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria; Kite/Gilead, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Celgene, ADC Therapeutics, Incyte, Miltenyi: Consultancy. Morschhauser:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, AbbVie, BMS, Genmab, Gilead, Novartis: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Gilead, AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Safar:janssen: Honoraria. Cheminant:AstraZeneca: Other: Travel accomodations and Meeting inscription; Innate Pharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding. Hermine:AB science: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company, Research Funding; Inatherys: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Research Funding; BMS, Roche, Blueprint, Alexion: Research Funding. [Display omitted]
Author Ribrag, Vincent
Morschhauser, Franck
Tessoulin, Benoit
Gressin, Remy
Cheminant, Morgane
Houot, Roch
Thieblemont, Catherine
Hermine, Olivier
Oberic, Lucie
Le Gouill, Steven
Callanan, Mary
Cacheux, Victoria
Macintyre, Elizabeth A.
Damaj, Gandhi Laurent
Sarkozy, Clementine
Bouabdallah, Krimo
Delwail, Vincent
Burroni, Barbara
Safar, Violaine
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Clementine
  surname: Sarkozy
  fullname: Sarkozy, Clementine
  organization: institut Curie, Saint Cloud, France
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Mary
  surname: Callanan
  fullname: Callanan, Mary
  organization: CHU Dijon, Dijon, France
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Catherine
  surname: Thieblemont
  fullname: Thieblemont, Catherine
  organization: Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Hemato-oncologie, Université de Paris, Paris, France
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Lucie
  surname: Oberic
  fullname: Oberic, Lucie
  organization: Hematology Department, IUCT - Oncopole, Toulouse, Toulouse, FRA
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Barbara
  surname: Burroni
  fullname: Burroni, Barbara
  organization: Pathology, Cochin, Paris, FRA
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Krimo
  surname: Bouabdallah
  fullname: Bouabdallah, Krimo
  organization: CHU Bordeaux Pessac, Bordeaux, FRA
– sequence: 7
  givenname: Gandhi Laurent
  surname: Damaj
  fullname: Damaj, Gandhi Laurent
  organization: CHU Caen, Caen, FRA
– sequence: 8
  givenname: Benoit
  surname: Tessoulin
  fullname: Tessoulin, Benoit
  organization: Hematology Department, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France
– sequence: 9
  givenname: Vincent
  surname: Ribrag
  fullname: Ribrag, Vincent
  organization: Département d'Innovation Thérapeutique et d'Essais Précoces (DITEP), Gustave Roussy Institute of Cancer, Villejuif, France
– sequence: 10
  givenname: Roch
  surname: Houot
  fullname: Houot, Roch
  organization: Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Rennes, Université de Rennes, Rennes Cedex, FRA
– sequence: 11
  givenname: Franck
  surname: Morschhauser
  fullname: Morschhauser, Franck
  organization: Hôpital Claude Huriez Univ. Lille, CHU Lille, Lille, France
– sequence: 12
  givenname: Victoria
  surname: Cacheux
  fullname: Cacheux, Victoria
  organization: CHU Estaing, Clermont Ferrand, FRA
– sequence: 13
  givenname: Vincent
  surname: Delwail
  fullname: Delwail, Vincent
  organization: Hematology, CHU Poitiers, Poitiers, FRA
– sequence: 14
  givenname: Violaine
  surname: Safar
  fullname: Safar, Violaine
  organization: Hematology, CHLS, CHU Lyon, Pierre Bénite, France
– sequence: 15
  givenname: Remy
  surname: Gressin
  fullname: Gressin, Remy
  organization: HOPITAL ALBERT MICHALLON, Department of Hematology, University Hospital Grenoble, Grenoble, France
– sequence: 16
  givenname: Morgane
  surname: Cheminant
  fullname: Cheminant, Morgane
  organization: Department of Hematology, Necker Hospital, APHP, Paris, France
– sequence: 17
  givenname: Olivier
  surname: Hermine
  fullname: Hermine, Olivier
  organization: Department of Hematology, Necker Hospital, APHP, Paris, France
– sequence: 18
  givenname: Elizabeth A.
  surname: Macintyre
  fullname: Macintyre, Elizabeth A.
  organization: Laboratory of Onco-Hematology, Necker Enfants-Malades Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Université Paris Cité, Paris, France, Paris, FRA
– sequence: 19
  givenname: Steven
  surname: Le Gouill
  fullname: Le Gouill, Steven
  organization: Hematology Department, Institut Curie, Paris, France
BookMark eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqXwAez8AQQ8SZyHWKGIlxQEQpRtNLGnYJQ6le0A5Qf4bdKWFQtWdzTSuZo5B2zX9pYYOwZxClDEZ23X9zqKRZxEkKcpZDtsAjIuIiFiscsmQogsSssc9tmB929CQJrEcsK-71tjhzB8DQts-TM5P3j-aMLwadYLY_mTQ-uXHdrALzvzYtqO-MwGRxhI87uq5g8YDNngTzjyOwzq1dgXXvWLJTrje8tbCh9ElodX4vVqgRyt3gwRCBj7DXb-kO3Nx6Cj35yy2dXlU3UT1ffXt9VFHSnIM4gySSixVem8TLBElForrQtJQmkZgxRKCsIyzeZKgy5yKOMyz1qZIhYiB0ymLN_2Ktd772jeKBPG-_vxIzRdA6JZ-2w2Ppu1z2brcyThD7l0oyO3-pc53zI0vvRuyDVejaoUaeNIhUb35h_6B-_tkc0
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1182_blood_2023022351
crossref_primary_10_1182_blood_2023022354
crossref_primary_10_1182_blood_2024025563
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 2023 The American Society of Hematology
Copyright_xml – notice: 2023 The American Society of Hematology
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
DOI 10.1182/blood-2023-174416
DatabaseName CrossRef
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
DatabaseTitleList CrossRef

DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
Chemistry
Biology
Anatomy & Physiology
EISSN 1528-0020
EndPage 980
ExternalDocumentID 10_1182_blood_2023_174416
S0006497123055842
GroupedDBID ---
-~X
.55
0R~
1CY
23N
2WC
34G
39C
4.4
53G
5GY
5RE
5VS
6J9
AAEDW
AALRI
AAXUO
ABOCM
ABVKL
ACGFO
ADBBV
AENEX
AFETI
AFOSN
AITUG
AKRWK
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AMRAJ
BAWUL
BTFSW
CS3
DIK
DU5
E3Z
EBS
EJD
EX3
F5P
FDB
FRP
GS5
GX1
H13
IH2
K-O
KQ8
L7B
LSO
MJL
N9A
OK1
P2P
R.V
RHF
RHI
ROL
SJN
THE
TR2
TWZ
W2D
W8F
WH7
WOQ
WOW
X7M
YHG
YKV
AAYWO
AAYXX
ACVFH
ADCNI
AEUPX
AFPUW
AGCQF
AIGII
AKBMS
AKYEP
CITATION
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c1761-65ea5abc4f93a9aa5ddcdd85e0cd52150c50ea946fcd1d87192976b54aa8071a3
ISSN 0006-4971
IngestDate Tue Jul 01 02:45:41 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:01:18 EDT 2025
Tue Dec 03 03:44:26 EST 2024
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue Supplement 1
Language English
LinkModel OpenURL
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c1761-65ea5abc4f93a9aa5ddcdd85e0cd52150c50ea946fcd1d87192976b54aa8071a3
PageCount 1
ParticipantIDs crossref_citationtrail_10_1182_blood_2023_174416
crossref_primary_10_1182_blood_2023_174416
elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1182_blood_2023_174416
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2023-11-02
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2023-11-02
PublicationDate_xml – month: 11
  year: 2023
  text: 2023-11-02
  day: 02
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationTitle Blood
PublicationYear 2023
Publisher Elsevier Inc
Publisher_xml – name: Elsevier Inc
SSID ssj0014325
Score 2.4397056
Snippet Aim: Obinutuzumab (O) and Rituximab (R) have never been compared in a prospective randomized trial in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The LYMA-101 trial...
SourceID crossref
elsevier
SourceType Enrichment Source
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 980
Title Obinutuzumab Versus Rituximab in Transplant Eligible Untreated MCL Patients, a Matching Comparison between the Lyma and Lyma-101 Trials
URI https://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2023-174416
Volume 142
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Lb9NAEF6FIh4XBCmI8tIcEAeCqR-7a_tYIlCFGhAokXqz1usNtUgcVGyJ9g_wu_hnzD7sODRFlIvlrOz12vNldnbnmxlCnuuEKb5gkRepgHp0nisvmSOWGY25YIHkUahjhycf-OGMvj9mx4PBrx5rqanz1_J8a1zJ_0gV21CuOkr2CpLtOsUGPEf54hEljMd_kvFHXNY2dXPeLEU-0jtfzffR57JufpS6oaxc6vIFfj3N3_pS6jCpWWXI5WhoTsZHOkV_abkU45EYTVAxn3RMAFuesGVyaQv16GxpYrjMCerWAJ-gX3PDNbxw9efNxo04_bo6twRfS1Tv-fHHehPf1UeeiDUfeXpSKl3lZlXVG0GK3YZwrr1MZkehkaXqb1yEkYngCzeUMdcF7iy0lNO_OmG2H_obCpqGPSSaaqdmwKOgp3lTWxDKTeLu18X5IdH5Zm1MgB1TjPbgllzcf8yRHXPRrJmSMDNdZLqLzHZxjVwPYzTfNC_g09qRRaPQFtFw7-oc69jF_oVRbDeNeubO9C6549YpcGBBd48MVDUkuweVqFfLM3gBhjlsXDJDcuNNe3Zr3NYPHJKbE0fb2CU_-0AFC1TogAplBWugQgtU6IAKCFRogfoKBLQwhTVMwcEUECug0QkIU2hhCham98ns3dvp-NBzFUA8GcQ88DhTgolc0nkaiVQIVhSyKBKmfFmg3cl8yXwlUsrnsggKXPujsR_znFEhErSdRfSA7FSrSj0kIJOE-jrzkkgZ5dwXeE0csRzXa6HiebpH_PbjZ9Klx9dVWhbZpSLfIy-7W77Z3DB_u5i2Es2ccWuN1gyxefltj67yjMfk9vqP9oTs1KeNeoo2c50_M6j8DWylwhc
linkProvider Colorado Alliance of Research Libraries
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Obinutuzumab+Versus+Rituximab+in+Transplant+Eligible+Untreated+MCL+Patients%2C+a+Matching+Comparison+between+the+Lyma+and+Lyma-101+Trials&rft.jtitle=Blood&rft.au=Sarkozy%2C+Clementine&rft.au=Callanan%2C+Mary&rft.au=Thieblemont%2C+Catherine&rft.au=Oberic%2C+Lucie&rft.date=2023-11-02&rft.issn=0006-4971&rft.eissn=1528-0020&rft.volume=142&rft.issue=Supplement+1&rft.spage=980&rft.epage=980&rft_id=info:doi/10.1182%2Fblood-2023-174416&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1182_blood_2023_174416
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0006-4971&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0006-4971&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0006-4971&client=summon