Abstract CT212: A ctDNA-directed, multi-center phase II study of molecular response adaptive immuno-chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Analysis of Stage 1 of CCTG BR.36
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: Analyses of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) have shown promise in capturing tumor burden dynamics during immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), with the potential to allow patients with primary resistance to be rapidly identified and redirected to alternative therapies. Methods: BR.36 is an international multicenter, open label, biomarker-directed, phase II trial of molecular response-adaptive immuno-chemotherapy for patients with treatment-naïve non-small cell lung cancer-NSCLC (NCT04093167). The trial consists of two stages; stage 1 was a single-arm study to validate the ctDNA approach, with stage 2 focusing on ctDNA guided treatment selection. Key eligibility criteria included EGFR and ALK mutation negative, ICB and chemotherapy-naïve metastatic NSCLC with PD-L1 expression ≥1%. Primary objectives were to ascertain ctDNA molecular response, determine its timing and concordance with radiologic RECIST/iRECIST response. Secondary objectives included the evaluation of time to ctDNA molecular response and its correlation with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Liquid biopsy analyses utilized a validated tumor-agnostic white blood cell (WBC) DNA-informed 33-gene panel approach. Ultra-sensitive error-correction ctDNA next-generation sequencing (NGS) was performed at baseline/cycle 1 (C1D1), cycle 2 (C2D1) and cycle 3 (C3D1) of pembrolizumab (200mg IV q3 weeks). The maximum variant allele fraction (maxVAF) of tumor-derived variants was tracked from the pre-treatment to on-therapy timepoints. Results: Activated October 17, 2019, stage 1 completed accrual of 50 patients on April 5, 2022; data lock date was September 20, 2022. Most patients were ever-smokers (98%), had no prior systemic therapy (92%), stage IV NSCLC (98%), adenocarcinoma (76%) with PD-L1 tumor proportion score of ≥ 50% (96%); cohort consisted of 82% white, 52% female, 56% age>65 and 76% ECOG PS 1 participants. Median follow-up was 13.5 months (range 2.5-23.0). Best overall response rate (ORR) by RECIST was 32% with a median duration of 10.1 months. Matched WBC DNA analyses allowed for effective removal of germline and clonal hematopoiesis variants, followed by evaluation of ctDNA response. MaxVAF clearance signified molecular response (mR), while maxVAF persistence indicated molecular disease progression (mPD). Among 35 evaluable patients (77.8%), 15 were classified in the mR category, with an evaluable mR rate of 43% (90% CI: 0.29-0.58). The median time to molecular response was 2.1 months (90% CI: 1.5-2.6). The sensitivity of ctDNA molecular response for RECIST and iRECIST response was 82% (90% CI: 52%-97%) and 83% (90% CI: 56%-97%), with a specificity of 75% (90% CI: 56.5%-88.5%) and 78% (90% CI: 60%-91%) respectively. Patients with mR attained longer PFS (5.03 vs 2.6 months,) and OS (not reached vs 7.23 months); ctDNA response also provided prognostic information for patients with RECIST stable disease. Conclusions: ctDNA molecular responses were concordant with radiologic response assessments, but importantly better predicted PFS and OS for patients with stable disease or better. These findings are now incorporated into the interventional second stage of the trial. Citation Format: Valsamo K. Anagnostou, Cheryl Ho, Garth Nicholas, Rosalyn Anne Juergens, Adrian Sacher, Andrea Fung, Paul Wheatley-Price, Scott Laurie, Benjamin Levy, Julie Brahmer, Archana Balan, Noushin Niknafs, Egor Avrutin, Liting Zhu, Mark Sausen, Penelope Bradbury, Jill O'Donnell-Tormey, Pierre-Olivier Gaudreau, Keyue Ding, Janet Dancey. A ctDNA-directed, multi-center phase II study of molecular response adaptive immuno-chemotherapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Analysis of Stage 1 of CCTG BR.36 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT212.
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 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) | 0,005 | 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 ».