Abstract CT200: IMpower130: Progression-free survival (PFS) and safety analysis from a randomized phase 3 study of carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel (CnP) with or without atezolizumab as first-line (1L) therapy in advanced non-squamous NSCLC
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Atezolizumab (atezo) (anti-PD-L1) monotherapy improves overall survival (OS) vs docetaxel in 2L+ NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 status; phase 3, 1L studies have shown clinical benefit of atezo plus chemotherapy and atezo in combination with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. IMpower130 (NCT02367781) evaluated atezo + CnP vs CnP in patients (pts) with measurable (RECIST v1.1) stage IV non-squamous NSCLC.Methods: Pts (randomized 2:1) received atezo (1200 mg IV q3w) + CnP (carboplatin: AUC 6 q3w; nab-paclitaxel: 100 mg/m2 IV qw) (Arm A) or CnP (Arm B), for 4 or 6 21-day cycles and maintenance (Arm A: atezo until loss of clinical benefit; Arm B: best supportive care or pemetrexed q3w until disease progression [PD]). Crossover to atezo at PD was initially permitted for Arm B pts. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS and OS (ITT-WT population: EGFR-WT/ALK-negative). Secondary endpoints were OS and PFS (ITT population and by PD-L1 expression), response rate and safety. ITT population could be formally tested for OS/PFS if ITT-WT OS was positive.Results: 723 ITT (679 ITT-WT) pts were enrolled. Statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvements in OS and statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PFS (ITT and ITT-WT) were observed in Arm A vs Arm B (table). PFS and OS benefit was observed in all PD-L1 subgroups, and consistently across all subgroups, except in pts with liver metastases and EGFR/ALK genomic alterations. In treated pts, 73.2% (Arm A) vs 60.3% (Arm B) had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events.Conclusions: Overall, IMpower130 showed statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvements in OS and statistically significant improvements in PFS with atezo + CnP, vs CnP, in 1L, stage IV non-squamous NSCLC, in this predominantly ITT-WT population. No new safety signals were identified.Table.IMpower130 Efficacy AnalysesArm A Atezo + CnPArm B CnPITT-WTn = 451n = 228Median OS (95% CI)18.6 mo (16.0-21.2)13.9 mo (12.0-18.7)HR (95% CI; P value)0.79 (0.64-0.98; 0.033)12-mo OS (95% CI)63.1% (58.59-67.66)55.5% (48.89-62.17)Median PFS (95% CI)7.0 mo (6.2-7.3)5.5 mo (4.4-5.9)HR (95% CI; P value)0.64 (0.54-0.77; < 0.0001)12-mo PFS (95% CI)29.1% (24.83-33.44)14.1% (9.37-18.76)n = 447n = 226Confirmed ORR (investigator assessed) (95% CI)49.2% (44.49-53.96)31.9% (25.84-38.36)n = 220n = 72Median DOR (95% CI)8.4 mo (6.9-11.8)6.1 mo (5.5-7.9)PD-L1 highan = 88n = 42Median OS (95% CI)17.4 mo (14.78-NA)16.9 mo (10.94-NA)HR (95% CI)0.84 (0.51-1.39)Median PFS (95% CI)6.4 mo (5.49-9.76)4.6 mo (3.22-7)HR (95% CI)0.51 (0.34-0.77)PD-L1 lowan = 128n = 65Median OS (95% CI)23.7 mo (18.63-NA)15.9 mo (12.32-25.63)HR (95% CI)0.70 (0.45-1.08)Median PFS (95% CI)8.3 mo (7.16-10.35)6.0 mo (5.29-6.93)HR (95% CI)0.61 (0.43-0.85)PD-L1 negativean = 235n = 121Median OS (95% CI)15.2 mo (12.88-19.15)12.0 mo (8.97-17.71)HR (95% CI)0.81 (0.61-1.08)Median PFS (95% CI)6.2 mo (5.52-7.16)4.7 mo (4.11-5.72)HR (95% CI)0.72 (0.56-0.91)ITTn = 483n = 240Median OS (95% CI)18.1 mo (15.3-20.8)13.9 mo (12.0-18.2)HR (95% CI; P value)0.80 (0.65-0.99; 0.039)Median PFS (95% CI)7.0 mo (6.3-7.3)5.6 mo (4.5-5.9)HR (95% CI; P value)0.65 (0.54-0.77; < 0.0001)a PD-L1 high (TC3 or IC3): Patients with PD-L1 expression in ≥ 50% of tumor cells or ≥ 10% of tumor-infiltrating immune cells; PD-L1 low (TC1/2 or IC1/2): Patients with PD-L1 expression in ≥ 1% and < 50% of tumor cells or ≥ 1% and <10% of tumor-infiltrating immune cells; and PD-L1 negative (TC0 and IC0): Patients with PD-L1 expression in <1% of tumor cells and < 1% of tumor-infiltrating immune cells. Data cut-off: 15 March 2018. Minimum follow up: 13 months. NCT02367781.DOR, duration of response; HR, hazard ratio; IC, immune cells; ORR, objective response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; TC, tumor cells.Citation Format: Howard L. West, Michael McCleod, Maen Hussein, Alessandro Morabito, Achim Rittmeyer, Henry J. Conter, Hans-Georg Kopp, Davey Daniel, Steven McCune, Tarek Mekhail, Alona Zer, Niels Reinmuth, Ahad Sadiq, Venice Archer, Tania Ochi Lohmann, Helen Jessop, Lijia Wang, Marcin Kowanetz, Alan Sandler, Federico Cappuzzo. IMpower130: Progression-free survival (PFS) and safety analysis from a randomized phase 3 study of carboplatin + nab-paclitaxel (CnP) with or without atezolizumab as first-line (1L) therapy in advanced non-squamous NSCLC [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT200.
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 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,013 | 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 ».