The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin in relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (KEYNOTE-204): an interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study
Abstract
BACKGROUND PD-1 blockade via pembrolizumab monotherapy has shown antitumour activity and toxicity in patients with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Here, we present interim analyses from the KEYNOTE-204 study evaluating pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin for relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study, patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma with measurable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who were ineligible for or had relapsed after autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) were enrolled at 78 hospitals and cancer centres in 20 countries and territories. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive voice response system to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by previous autologous HSCT and status after front-line therapy. Results from the second interim analysis are presented here, with a database cutoff of Jan 16, 2020. The dual primary endpoints assessed in the intention-to-treat population were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review, and overall survival (not analysed at this interim analysis). Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02684292. Recruitment for this trial is closed. FINDINGS Between July 8, 2016, and July 13, 2018, 151 patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab and 153 to brentuximab vedotin. After a median time from randomisation to data cutoff of 25·7 months (IQR 23·4-33·0), median progression-free survival was 13·2 months (95% CI 10·9-19·4) for pembrolizumab versus 8·3 months (5·7-8·8) for brentuximab vedotin (hazard ratio 0·65 [95% CI 0·48-0·88]; p=0·0027). The most common grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events were pneumonitis (six [4%] of 148 patients in the pembrolizumab group vs one [1%] of 152 patients in the brentuximab vedotin group), neutropenia (three [2%] vs 11 [7%]), decreased neutrophil count (one [1%] vs seven [5%]), and peripheral neuropathy (one [1%] vs five [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 (16%) of 148 patients receiving pembrolizumab and 16 (11%) of 152 patients receiving brentuximab vedotin. One treatment-related death due to pneumonia occurred in the pembrolizumab group. INTERPRETATION Pembrolizumab showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival compared with brentuximab vedotin, with safety consistent with previous reports. These data support pembrolizumab as the preferred treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma who have relapsed post-autologous HSCT or are ineligible for autologous HSCT. FUNDING Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp (a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group
Oken, M. M., Creech, R. H., Tormey, D. C., Horton, J., Davis, T. E., McFadden, E. T., & Carbone, P. P. (1982) · AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY · doi:10.1097/00000421-198212000-00014 · Cited by 11,647
PD-1 and Its Ligands in Tolerance and Immunity
Keir, M. E., Butte, M. J., Freeman, G. J., & Sharpe, A. H. (2008) · Annual Review of Immunology · doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.26.021607.090331 · Cited by 5,378
Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma
Cheson, B. D., Pfistner, B., Juweid, M. E., Gascoyne, R. D., Specht, L., Horning, S. J., Coiffier, B., Fisher, R. I., Hagenbeek, A., Zucca, E., et al. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.09.2403 · Cited by 4,426
Younes, A., Gopal, A. K., Smith, S. E., Ansell, S. M., Rosenblatt, J. D., Savage, K. J., Ramchandren, R., Bartlett, N. L., Cheson, B. D., de Vos, S., et al. (2012) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.38.0410 · Cited by 1,529
Self-citationBrentuximab Vedotin (SGN-35) for Relapsed CD30-Positive Lymphomas
Younes, A., Bartlett, N. L., Leonard, J. P., Kennedy, D. A., Lynch, C. M., Sievers, E. L., & Forero-Torres, A. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1002965 · Cited by 1,368
Chen, R., Zinzani, P. L., Fanale, M. A., Armand, P., Johnson, N. A., Brice, P., Radford, J., Ribrag, V., Molin, D., Vassilakopoulos, T. P., et al. (2017) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2016.72.1316 · Cited by 989
Self-citationYounes, A., Santoro, A., Shipp, M., Zinzani, P. L., Timmerman, J. M., Ansell, S., Armand, P., Fanale, M., Ratanatharathorn, V., Kuruvilla, J., et al. (2016) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(16)30167-x · Cited by 927
Self-citationBrentuximab Vedotin with Chemotherapy for Stage III or IV Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
Connors, J. M., Jurczak, W., Straus, D. J., Ansell, S. M., Kim, W. S., Gallamini, A., Younes, A., Alekseev, S., Illés, Á., Picardi, M., et al. (2018) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1708984 · Cited by 789
Self-citationArmand, P., Engert, A., Younes, A., Fanale, M., Santoro, A., Zinzani, P. L., Timmerman, J. M., Collins, G. P., Ramchandren, R., Cohen, J. B., et al. (2018) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2017.76.0793 · Cited by 759
Self-citationMoskowitz, C. H., Nademanee, A., Masszi, T., Agura, E., Holowiecki, J., Abidi, M. H., Chen, A. I., Stiff, P., Gianni, A. M., Carella, A., et al. (2015) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(15)60165-9 · Cited by 742
Cited by
Tumor immunotherapies by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); the pros and cons
Naimi, A., Mohammed, R. N., Raji, A., Chupradit, S., Yumashev, A. V., Suksatan, W., Shalaby, M. N., Thangavelu, L., Kamrava, S., Shomali, N., et al. (2022) · Cell Communication and Signaling · doi:10.1186/s12964-022-00854-y · Cited by 507
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuruvilla, J., Ramchandren, R., Santoro, A., Paszkiewicz-Kozik, E., Gasiorowski, R., Johnson, N. A., Fogliatto, L. M., Goncalves, I., de Oliveira, J. S. R., Buccheri, V., Perini, G. F., Goldschmidt, N., Kriachok, I., Dickinson, M., Komarnicki, M., McDonald, A., Ozcan, M., Sekiguchi, N., Zhu, Y., Nahar, A., Marinello, P., & Zinzani, P. L.
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-04
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 512-524
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3137610925
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 20
- FWCI
- 26.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin in relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (KEYNOTE-204): an interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00005-x
- The paper
- Kuruvilla, J., Ramchandren, R., Santoro, A., Paszkiewicz-Kozik, E., Gasiorowski, R., Johnson, N. A., Fogliatto, L. M., Goncalves, I., de Oliveira, J. S. R., Buccheri, V., Perini, G. F., Goldschmidt, N., Kriachok, I., Dickinson, M., Komarnicki, M., McDonald, A., Ozcan, M., Sekiguchi, N., Zhu, Y., . . . Zinzani, P. L. (2021). Pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin in relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (KEYNOTE-204): an interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(21)00005-x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.