IND227 phase III (P3) study of cisplatin/pemetrexed (CP) with or without pembrolizumab (pembro) in patients (pts) with malignant pleural mesothelioma (PM): A CCTG, NCIN, and IFCT trial.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
LBA8505 Background: The vast majority of pts with PM have unresectable disease, due to co-morbidities and/or advanced stage. In unresectable PM, standard first line treatment has been C(or carboplatin)P for 20 years but it is usually only moderately efficient, mostly on epithelioid (E)PM, with a global median overall survival (mOS) around 12 months (m), an improved quality-of-life (QoL), and mild toxicity. Trial CM743 demonstrated a significant improvement in mOS for nivolumab/ipilimumab (NI) over CP (18.1 versus 14.1 m), particularly for non-EPM, but 30% NI pts experienced > grade 3 toxicity. Thus, alternative therapies to improve mOS and tolerability are needed. Methods: Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG) IND 227 is an academic, open-label, randomized P3 study of the CCTG, National Cancer Institute of Naples (NCIN) and Intergroupe Francophone de Cancérologie Thoracique (IFCT). The study was supported by grants to CCTG (Canadian Cancer Society -707213); Merck & Co. Inc provided pembrolizumab (pembro) and a grant to support study conduct. Untreated unresectable PM pts ≥ 18 years with ECOG performance status 0-1, adequate hematological, renal and hepatic function, no active autoimmune disease, brain metastases, interstitial lung disease or other active co-morbidities, were randomized 1:1 to CP with or without pembro and stratified by histology (E vs. non-E). Carboplatin was allowed if C contraindicated. Radiological review (BICR) and PD-L1 testing was centralised. mOS was the primary endpoint; median progression-free survival (PFS) and response rate (RR), QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 + QLQ-LC13) and economic analysis were secondary. Results: A total 440 PM pts were randomized; 218 to CP and 222 to CP-pembro. Data cut-off was 16 September 2022 when the required events was observed. All pts were included in the analyses. Arms were well balanced. Seven pts opted not to receive CP. Median exposure of CP was comparable between arms. Subsequent treatment with chemotherapy was similar in both arms, while 59 pts in CP arm (vs 17 CP-pembro pts) received immunotherapeutics. Using a stratified log rank test, mOS was 17.3m vs 16.1m for CP-pembro vs CP (HR 0.79 95%CI 0.64-0.98; p=0.0324), mPFS was 7.13m vs 7.16m (HR 0.80, 95%CI 0.65-0.99, p=0.0372). BOR was significantly higher for CP-pembro (63% vs 40%, p < 0.0001). Grade 3 or higher pembro related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 19% of patients (88% were grade 3; the most common were fatigue (5%) and diarrhea, pneumonitis and irAE (2% each)), and 16% of pts discontinued pembro per protocol for related AEs (most commonly diarrhea and pneumonitis). Conclusions: With a statistically significant improvement in mOS and acceptable tolerability. CP-pembro is an option for treatment naïve, unresectable PM. Clinical trial information: NCT02784171 .
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».