Follicular Lymphoma (FL)
Conditions
Keywords
Follicular Lymphoma (FL), Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), Lymphoma, Cancer, Epcoritamab, Rituximab, Lenalidomide, Chemoimmunotherapy (CIT), Obinutuzumab, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin Hydrochloride, Vincristine Sulfate, Prednisone, Bendamustine (Benda), R-CHOP, G-CHOP, R-Benda, G-Benda, EPCORE™FL-2
Brief summary
Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the second most common B-cell cancer and the most common type of cancer of lymphocytes. Unfortunately, this disease is incurable with conventional treatment and the disease recurs in almost all patients. This study will assess how safe and effective epcoritamab is in combination with lenalidomide and rituximab (R2) in treating adult participants with previously untreated FL. Adverse events and change in disease condition will be assessed. Epcoritamab is an investigational drug being developed for the treatment of FL. Study doctors put the participants in 1 of 5 groups, called treatment arms. Each group receives a different treatment. Around 1095 adult participants with previously untreated FL will be enrolled in approximately 250 sites across the world. Participants will receive R2 (intravenous \[IV\] infusion of rituximab (R) and oral capsules of lenalidomide) alone or in combination with subcutaneous injections of epcoritamab. Participants may also receive investigator's choice chemoimmunotherapy (CIT): IV infusion of obinutuzumab (G) and IV injections of cyclophosphamide, IV injections of doxorubicin, IV injections of vincristine, oral tablets of prednisone (CHOP) \[G-CHOP\]/ R-CHOP or G and IV infusion of bendamustine (Benda) \[G-Benda\]/R-Benda. The total treatment duration will be 120 weeks for all arms except A2, which is 24 weeks of treatment. There may be higher treatment burden for participants in this trial compared to their standard of care. Participants will attend regular visits during the study at a hospital or clinic. The effect of the treatment will be checked by medical assessments, blood tests, checking for side effects and completing questionnaires.
Interventions
DRUGEpcoritamab
Subcutaneous (SC) Injection
DRUGPrednisone
Oral Tablet
DRUGRituximab
Intravenous (IV) Infusion
DRUGLenalidomide
Oral Capsule
DRUGDoxorubicin
IV Injection
DRUGVincristine
IV Injection
DRUGCyclophosphamide
IV Injection
DRUGObinutuzumab
IV Infusion
DRUGBendamustine
IV Infusion
Sponsors
Genmab
AbbVie
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Diagnosis of follicular lymphoma (FL). * Have CD20+, histologically confirmed classic FL (previously Grade 1 to 3a FL) at most recent representative tumor biopsy based on the local pathology report, according to the 5th edition of World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours. * Are willing and able to comply with procedures required in the protocol. * Must have stage, III, IV or II with bulky disease \>= 7cm). * Must be in need of systemic treatment per investigator, as evidenced by meeting at least one of the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes Folliculaire (GELF) criteria. * Has one or more target lesions: * A positron emission tomography (PET)/computerized tomography (CT) scan demonstrating PET-positive lesion(s), and * \>=1 measurable nodal lesion (long axis \>1.5cm) or \>=1 measurable extra-nodal lesion (long axis \>1.0 cm) on CT scan or MRI * Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2. * Able to receive at least one of the standard of care chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) treatment regimens: \[Arm B\] at the discretion of the Investigator, and rituximab and lenalidomide (R2) \[Arm C\]. * Have laboratory values meeting the criteria in the protocol.
Exclusion criteria
* Had major surgery within 4 weeks prior to randomization. * Have active cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Percentage of Participants who Achieve Complete Response rate at 30 months (CR30) | Up to 30 Months | CR30 will be determined by positron emission tomography-computerized tomography (cat scan) \[PET-CT\] per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by independent review committee (IRC). |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with Progression-free survival (PFS) | Up to 10 Years | PFS is defined as the time from randomization until disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per IRC, or death, whichever occurs first. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Overall Survival (OS) | Up to 10 Years | OS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death of any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Rate of Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Negativity Rate | Up to 10 Years | MRD negativity rate, defined as the absence of tumor specific molecules in whole blood and/or bone marrow in participants with follicular lymphoma (FL) MRD at baseline. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change from Baseline in Physical Functioning (PF) According to European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire for Cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30) | 21 Weeks | The PF of EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 5-item questionnaire to assess the physical function of the participant, with a higher score indication worse functioning. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Percentage of Participants who Achieve CR30 | Up to 30 Months | CR30 will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Percentage of Participants who Achieve CR30 | Up to 30 Months | CR30 will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Number of Participants with PFS | Up to 10 Years | PFS is defined as the time from randomization until disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per IRC, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Number of Participants with PFS | Up to 10 Years | PFS is defined as the time from randomization until disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per IRC, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Rate of MRD Negativity | Up to 10 Years | MRD negativity, defined as the absence of tumor specific molecules in whole blood and/or bone marrow in participants with FL MRD at baseline. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Rate of MRD Negativity | Up to 10 Years | MRD negativity, defined as the absence of tumor specific molecules in whole blood and/or bone marrow in participants with FL MRD at baseline. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change from Baseline in PF According to EORTC QLQ-C30 | Up to 10 Years | The PF of EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 5-item questionnaire to assess the physical function of the participant, with a higher score indication worse functioning. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change from Baseline in PF According to EORTC QLQ-C30 | Up to 10 Years | The PF of EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 5-item questionnaire to assess the physical function of the participant, with a higher score indication worse functioning. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: OS | Up to 10 Years | OS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death of any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: OS | Up to 10 Years | OS is defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death of any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Percentage of Participants who Achieve CR30 | Up to 30 Months | CR30 will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with PFS | Up to 10 Years | PFS is defined as the time from randomization until disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per investigator, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Percentage of Participants with Change in CR Rate per IRC | Up to 10 Years | CR will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Percentage of Participants with Change in CR Rate per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | CR will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Percentage of Participants with Change in CR Rate per IRC | Up to 10 Years | CR will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Percentage of Participants with Change in CR Rate per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | CR will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Percentage of Participants with Change in CR Rate per IRC | Up to 10 Years | CR will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Percentage of Participants with Change in CR Rate per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | CR will be determined by PET-CT per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Number of Participants with Best Overall Response (BOR) per per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | BOR is defined as the percentage of participants who achieve CR or partial response (PR) determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by investigator, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Number of Participants with BOR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | BOR is defined as the percentage of participants who achieve CR or PR determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by IRC, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with BOR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | BOR is defined as the percentage of participants who achieve CR or PR determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by investigator, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with BOR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | BOR is defined as the percentage of participants who achieve CR or PR determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by IRC, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Number of Participants with BOR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | BOR is defined as the percentage of participants who achieve CR or PR determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by investigator, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Number of Participants with BOR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | BOR is defined as the percentage of participants who achieve CR or PR determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by IRC, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Number of Participants with Event-free Survival (EFS) per IRC | Up to 10 Years | EFS is defined as the time from randomization until adverse event determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per IRC, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Number of Participants with EFS per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | EFS is defined as the time from randomization until adverse event determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per investigator, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with EFS per IRC | Up to 10 Years | EFS is defined as the time from randomization until adverse event determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per IRC, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with EFS per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | EFS is defined as the time from randomization until adverse event determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per investigator, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Number of Participants with EFS per IRC | Up to 10 Years | EFS is defined as the time from randomization until adverse event determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per IRC, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Number of Participants with EFS per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | EFS is defined as the time from randomization until adverse event determined by Lugano 2014 criteria per investigator, or death, whichever occurs first. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Duration of Response (DOR) per IRC | Up to 10 Years | DOR is defined as the time from PR or CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: DOR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | DOR is defined as the time from PR or CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: DOR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | DOR is defined as the time from PR or CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: DOR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | DOR is defined as the time from PR or CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: DOR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | DOR is defined as the time from PR or CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: DOR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | DOR is defined as the time from PR or CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Duration of Complete Response (DOCR) per IRC | Up to 10 Years | DOCR is defined as the time from CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: DOCR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | DOCR is defined as the time from CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: DOCR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | DOCR is defined as the time from CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: DOCR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | DOCR is defined as the time from CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: DOCR per IRC | Up to 10 Years | DOCR is defined as the time from CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: DOCR per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | DOCR is defined as the time from CR to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Time to Next Anti-lymphoma Therapy (TTNT) per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: TTNT per IRC | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: TTNT per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: TTNT per IRC | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: TTNT per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: TTNT per IRC | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: TTNT per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | TTNT is defined as the time from randomization to first documented administration of subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Time to Progression per IRC | Up to 10 Years | Time to progression defined as the time from randomization to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Time to Progression per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | Time to progression defined as the time from randomization to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Time to Progression per IRC | Up to 10 Years | Time to progression defined as the time from randomization to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Time to Progression per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | Time to progression defined as the time from randomization to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Time to Progression per IRC | Up to 10 Years | Time to progression defined as the time from randomization to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by IRC. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Time to Progression per Investigator | Up to 10 Years | Time to progression defined as the time from randomization to disease progression per Lugano 2014 criteria, as assessed by investigator. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Number of Participants with Progression-free Survival After Subsequent Anti-Lymphoma Therapy (PFS2) | Up to 10 Years | PFS2 is defined as the time after subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy to the earliest occurrence of disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by investigator, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Number of Participants with PFS2 | Up to 10 Years | PFS2 is defined as the time after subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy to the earliest occurrence of disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by investigator, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Number of Participants with PFS2 | Up to 10 Years | PFS2 is defined as the time after subsequent anti-lymphoma therapy to the earliest occurrence of disease progression determined by Lugano 2014 criteria as assessed by investigator, or death from any cause. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in Tolerability as Measured by Patient Reported Outcomes-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) | Up to 10 Years | The PRO-CTCAE is a patient-reported outcome measurement system developed to assess symptomatic toxicity in participants in cancer clinical trials. PRO-CTCAE items evaluate common symptoms from study treatment on their frequency, severity, interference, amount, presence/absence. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change in Tolerability as Measured by PRO-CTCAE | Up to 10 Years | The PRO-CTCAE is a patient-reported outcome measurement system developed to assess symptomatic toxicity in participants in cancer clinical trials. PRO-CTCAE items evaluate common symptoms from study treatment on their frequency, severity, interference, amount, presence/absence. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in Tolerability as Measured by PRO-CTCAE | Up to 10 Years | The PRO-CTCAE is a patient-reported outcome measurement system developed to assess symptomatic toxicity in participants in cancer clinical trials. PRO-CTCAE items evaluate common symptoms from study treatment on their frequency, severity, interference, amount, presence/absence. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in Tolerability as Measured by The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) Item GP5 | Up to 10 Years | The functional assessment of cancer therapy singly item - GP5 (FACT-GP5) is a single question asking if participant is bothered by side effects of treatment. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change in Tolerability as Measured by FACT-G Item GP5 | Up to 10 Years | The FACT-GP5 is a single question asking if participant is bothered by side effects of treatment. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in Tolerability as Measured by FACT-GG Item GP5 | Up to 10 Years | The FACT-GP5 is a single question asking if participant is bothered by side effects of treatment. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in Symptoms as Measured by The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym patient reported outcome (PRO) is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change in Symptoms as Measured by FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym patient reported outcome (PRO) is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in Symptoms as Measured by FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym patient reported outcome (PRO) is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in Quality of Life (QoL) as Measured by FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym PRO is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change in QoL as Measured by FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym PRO is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in QoL as Measured by FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym PRO is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Time-to-first PRO deterioration (TTD) in well-being using the lymphoma subscale (LymS) of FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym PRO is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: TTD in well-being using LymS of FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym PRO is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: TTD in well-being using LymS of FACT-Lym | Up to 10 Years | The objective of the FACT-Lym PRO is to assess health-related quality of life issues for adult lymphoma patients. It utilizes a 5-point Likert-type scale. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in QoL as Measured by 5-Level European Quality of Life (EuroQol)-5-dimension [EQ-5D-5L] | Up to 10 Years | The EQ-5D-5L is a standardized, non-disease specific instrument used to measure health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-5L assesses general health on 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 5 levels (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems). The scores for the 5 dimensions are used to compute a single utility index score ranging from 0 to 1 representing the general health status of the individual, with higher scores indicating better health state. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change in QoL as Measured by EQ-5D-5L | Up to 10 Years | The EQ-5D-5L is a standardized, non-disease specific instrument used to measure health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-5L assesses general health on 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 5 levels (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems). The scores for the 5 dimensions are used to compute a single utility index score ranging from 0 to 1 representing the general health status of the individual, with higher scores indicating better health state. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in QoL as Measured by EQ-5D-5L | Up to 10 Years | The EQ-5D-5L is a standardized, non-disease specific instrument used to measure health-related quality of life. The EQ-5D-5L assesses general health on 5 dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression). Each dimension has 5 levels (no problems, slight problems, moderate problems, severe problems, and extreme problems). The scores for the 5 dimensions are used to compute a single utility index score ranging from 0 to 1 representing the general health status of the individual, with higher scores indicating better health state. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: TTD in PF using the QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Scale | Up to 10 Years | The PF of EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 5-item questionnaire to assess the physical function of the participant, with a higher score indication worse functioning. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: TTD in PF using the QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Scale | Up to 10 Years | The PF of EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 5-item questionnaire to assess the physical function of the participant, with a higher score indication worse functioning. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: TTD in PF using the QLQ-C30 Physical Functioning Scale | Up to 10 Years | The PF of EORTC QLQ-C30 is a 5-item questionnaire to assess the physical function of the participant, with a higher score indication worse functioning. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change from baseline in the remaining items and domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 | Up to 10 Years | The EORTC QLQ-C30: A 30 items questionnaire to assess the quality of life of cancer patients on physical, emotional, cognitive, and social functions and symptoms. with a higher score indication worse quality of life. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change from baseline in the remaining items and domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 | Up to 10 Years | The EORTC QLQ-C30: A 30 items questionnaire to assess the quality of life of cancer patients on physical, emotional, cognitive, and social functions and symptoms. with a higher score indication worse quality of life. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change from baseline in the remaining items and domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 | Up to 10 Years | The EORTC QLQ-C30: A 30 items questionnaire to assess the quality of life of cancer patients on physical, emotional, cognitive, and social functions and symptoms. with a higher score indication worse quality of life. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) for General Lymphoma Symptoms | Up to 10 Years | The self-report measure PGIC reflects a participant's belief about the efficacy of treatment. The PGIC is a 7-point scale depicting a participant's rating of overall improvement since start of treatment. Participants rate their change as very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in PGIC for General Lymphoma Symptoms | Up to 10 Years | The self-report measure PGIC reflects a participant's belief about the efficacy of treatment. The PGIC is a 7-point scale depicting a participant's rating of overall improvement since start of treatment. Participants rate their change as very much improved, much improved, minimally improved, no change, minimally worse, much worse, or very much worse. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm A2: Change in Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) for General Lymphoma Symptoms | Up to 10 Years | The self-report measure PGIS reflects a participant's belief about their lymphoma symptoms over the past 7 days. The PGIS is a 5-point scale depicting a participant's rating of overall severity. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm B: Change in PGIS for General Lymphoma Symptoms | Up to 10 Years | The self-report measure PGIS reflects a participant's belief about their lymphoma symptoms over the past 7 days. The PGIS is a 5-point scale depicting a participant's rating of overall severity. |
| Arm A1 vs Arm C: Change in PGIS for General Lymphoma Symptoms | Up to 10 Years | The self-report measure PGIS reflects a participant's belief about their lymphoma symptoms over the past 7 days. The PGIS is a 5-point scale depicting a participant's rating of overall severity. |
Countries
Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Turkey (Türkiye), United Kingdom, United States
Contacts
STUDY_DIRECTORABBVIE INC.
AbbVie
Outcome results
None listed