Abstract CT002: Phase 3 randomized trial comparing tebentafusp with investigator's choice in first line metastatic uveal melanoma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) has a poor prognosis with a 1-yr OS rate of 52%. No systemic treatment has proven an OS benefit in randomized trials. Tebentafusp (tebe), a bispecific consisting of an affinity-enhanced T cell receptor (TCR) fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target gp100+ cells, has shown promising activity in previously treated mUM pts. Here, we report the primary analysis of overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population (ITT) of a Ph3 trial of tebe vs. investigator's choice (IC) as first line (1L) therapy in pts with mUM [NCT03070392]. Materials and Methods: In this randomized, open-label, Ph3 trial, 1L HLA-A*02:01+ pts with mUM were randomized 2:1 to receive tebe or IC of pembrolizumab, ipilimumab or dacarbazine, stratified by LDH. The primary endpoint was OS, defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Dual primary objectives were to evaluate 1) OS in the ITT population by comparing all tebe-randomized pts to all IC-randomized pts; and 2) OS in tebentafusp-treated patients with rash during week 1 versus all IC-treated patients. Secondary endpoints included safety and RECIST-defined overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR). Here we present the OS in the ITT population. The study was unblinded by an independent data monitoring committee at the first pre-specified interim analysis. Investigator-reported radiographic-based endpoints were not mature at the first interim analysis. This analysis was conducted on the first interim analysis (data extracted Nov 2020). Results: 378 pts were randomized to tebe (252) or IC, including pembrolizumab (103), ipilimumab (15) or dacarbazine (7). Tebe significantly prolonged OS compared to IC (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36-0.71; P<0.0001) in the ITT population, with estimated 1-yr OS rate of 73.2% (95% CI 66.3-78.9) vs 57.5% (95% CI 47.0-66.6), respectively. The OS benefit of tebe was observed in pre-specified subgroups, including by stratification variable of LDH>ULN and versus pembrolizumab IC. Most common TRAEs were skin-related (gp100+ melanocytes) or cytokine-mediated (T cell activation) and included pyrexia, pruritus, and rash. These AEs decreased in frequency and severity after the first 3-4 doses and were generally manageable with standard interventions. In the tebe arm, the rate of treatment discontinuation due to TRAEs was low (<4%), and there were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: In 1L treatment of mUM pts, tebe monotherapy significantly improved OS compared to IC; the first investigational therapy to improve OS in pts with mUM. Tebe had a predictable and manageable AE profile with a low rate of related discontinuation. Tebe is the first TCR therapeutic to demonstrate an OS benefit. Citation Format: Sophie Piperno-Neumann, Jessica C. Hassel, Piotr Rutkowski, Jean-Francois Baurain, Marcus O. Butler, Max Schlaak, Ryan J. Sullivan, Sebastian Ochsenreither, Reinhard Dummer, John M. Kirkwood, Anthony M. Joshua, Joseph J. Sacco, Alexander N. Shoushtari, Marlana Orloff, Richard D. Carvajal, Omid Hamid, Shaad E. Abdullah, Chris Holland, Howard Goodall, Paul Nathan. Phase 3 randomized trial comparing tebentafusp with investigator's choice in first line metastatic uveal melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT002.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».