Abstract GS1-02: Final results of KEYNOTE-355: Randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs placebo + chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 trial (NCT02819518), pembrolizumab (pembro) combined with chemotherapy (chemo) showed statistically significant improvements in OS and PFS compared to placebo + chemo in patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with a combined positive score (CPS) ≥10. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in the CPS ≥1 population, and statistical significance was not tested in the ITT population due to the prespecified testing strategy. Here, we compare outcomes in subgroups of patients by additional CPS cut-offs to the primary results of KEYNOTE-355. Methods: 847 patients with measurable disease per RECIST v1.1, ECOG PS 0-1, and ≥6 month disease-free interval were randomized 2:1 to pembro + chemo (nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days; paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days; or gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 + carboplatin AUC 2 days 1 and 8 every 21 days) or placebo + chemo for up to 35 administrations of pembro/placebo or until progression/intolerable toxicity. Patients were stratified by chemo type (taxane or gemcitabine-carboplatin), PD-L1 status (CPS ≥1 or <1), and prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment with same-class chemo (yes or no). Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS (RECIST v1.1, blinded independent central review) in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (CPS ≥10 and ≥1) and in the ITT population. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs in the additional CPS subgroups were based on an unstratified Cox model. Results: At the time of the final analysis (data cutoff, June 15, 2021), the median time from randomization to data cutoff was 44 months. Baseline characteristics of the CPS 1-9, 10-19, and ≥20 subgroups were generally similar to those of the ITT population. In the primary analyses, the HRs (95% CI) for OS were 0.73 (0.55-0.95) in the CPS ≥10 subgroup, 0.86 (0.72-1.04) in the CPS ≥1 subgroup, and 0.89 (0.76-1.05) in the ITT population; HRs (95% CI) for PFS were 0.66 (0.50-0.88), 0.75 (0.62-0.91), and 0.82 (0.70-0.98), respectively. Efficacy data are presented for the additional CPS subgroups in the Table. For OS, results in the CPS 1-9 subgroup showed comparable efficacy for pembro + chemo and placebo + chemo; however, results in the CPS 10-19 and CPS ≥20 subgroups showed a similar treatment benefit with the addition of pembro. Results for PFS were generally consistent with those observed for OS. Conclusions: These results provide support that CPS ≥10 is a reasonable cut-off to define the population of patients with metastatic TNBC expected to derive treatment benefit from pembro + chemo. Table. Efficacy in additional subgroups of patients by PD-L1 CPSCPS subgroupTreatmentMedian OS, mo (95% CI)OS HR (95% CI)*Median PFS, mo (95% CI)PFS HR (95% CI)*1-9†Pembro + Chemo. n = 20513.9. (12.2-16.6)1.09 (0.85-1.40)5.7. (5.4-7.4)0.85 (0.65-1.11)Placebo + Chemo n = 10815.5. (12.4-17.6)5.6. (5.3-7.6)10-19†Pembro + Chemo. n = 8020.3. (15.2-29.0)0.71 (0.46-1.09)9.9. (7.4-11.8)0.70 (0.44-1.09)Placebo + Chemo n = 3917.6. (10.3-25.8)7.6. (5.3-9.7)≥20‡Pembro + Chemo. n = 14024.0 (19.0-28.3)0.72 (0.51-1.01)9.2 (7.6-11.8)0.62 (0.44-0.88)Placebo + Chemo n = 6415.6. (12.3-20.8)5.4 (3.9-7.2)*Analyses based on an unstratified Cox model. †Post-hoc analyses. ‡Prespecified exploratory analyses. Citation Format: Javier Cortes, David W. Cescon, Hope S. Rugo, Zbigniew Nowecki, Seock-Ah Im, Mastura Md Yusof, Carlos Gallardo, Oleg Lipatov, Carlos Henrique Barrios, Jose Perez-Garcia, Hiroji Iwata, Norikazu Masuda, Marco Torregroza Otero, Erhan Gokmen, Sherene Loi, Zifang Guo, Xuan Zhou, Vassiliki Karantza, Wilbur Pan, Peter Schmid. Final results of KEYNOTE-355: Randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs placebo + chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-02.
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 | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,017 | 0,002 |
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 ».