Abstract CT104: Efficacy of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) and relationship with PD-L1 expression in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Findings from KEYNOTE-001)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Preliminary KEYNOTE-001 data showed that the PD-1 inhibitor pembro has manageable safety and antitumor activity in previously treated and treatment-naive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In a training set of 182 pts, 129 of whom had measurable disease and tumor evaluable by an IHC clinical trial assay (CTA) for PD-L1 expression, ORR was higher in pts with membranous PD-L1 expression in ≥50% of tumor cells (proportion score [PS] ≥50%) vs PS <50%. We aimed to verify the relationship between PD-L1 expression and ORR in an independent validation set of NSCLC pts enrolled in KEYNOTE-001 and to assess the impact of PD-L1 expression in the combined training and validation sets. Methods: Advanced or metastatic NSCLC pts received pembro 2 mg/kg Q3W, 10 mg/kg Q3W, or 10 mg/kg Q2W. Response was assessed every 9 wk. Treatment decisions were managed per investigator-assessed irRC. Efficacy evaluation was per centrally assessed RECIST v1.1. PD-L1 expression was determined by the CTA. Before analysis, ORR and PD-L1 data from the validation set were merged in pts with measurable disease and CTA-evaluable tumors. Duration of response (DOR), PFS, and OS were assessed in all treated pts from the training and validation sets with CTA-evaluable tumors. Results: In all 495 pts from the training and validation sets, irrespective of PD-L1 expression, ORR was 19.4%, median DOR was 12.4 mo, median PFS was 3.7 mo, and median OS was 12.0 mo. 9% experienced grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs; 4% discontinued due to a treatment-related AE. There was 1 treatment-related death (pneumonitis). Of the 313 pts in the validation set, ORR in the 204 pts evaluable by the CTA was 45.2% in those with PS ≥50% (Table). The relationship between ORR and PD-L1 expression was observed in previously treated and treatment-naive pts (Table). In the 356 pts evaluable by the CTA in the total population, PFS and OS were longer in pts with PS ≥50% (Table). Median OS was not reached in pts with PS ≥50%, regardless of prior treatment. Median (range) DOR was similar in pts with PS ≥50% (12.4 mo [2+ to 22.8+]), 1-49% (10.3 mo [1.4+ to 10.3]), and <1% (NR [0.9+ to 10.8+]). Conclusion: Pembro provides durable antitumor efficacy and safety in pts with treatment-naive and previously treated NSCLC. These data validate that membranous PD-L1 expression in ≥50% of tumor cells identifies pts with advanced NSCLC who are particularly likely to obtain clinical benefit from pembro. Proportion Score (PS)≥50%1-49%<1%ORR in evaluable pts in the validation set,% (95% CI)Totaln = 73n = 103n = 2845.2 (33.5-57.3)16.5 (9.9-25.1)10.7 (2.3-28.2)Previously treatedn = 57n = 77n = 2243.9 (30.7-57.6)15.6 (8.3-25.6)9.1 (1.1-29.2)Treatment naiven = 16n = 26n = 650.0 (24.7-75.3)19.2 (6.6-39.4)16.7 (0.4-64.1)Survival in evaluable pts in the total population, mo, median (95% CI)PFSTotaln = 119n = 161n = 766.3 (2.9-12.5)3.3 (2.1-4.1)2.3 (2.1-4.0)Previously treatedn = 99n = 127n = 686.1 (2.1-12.5)2.3 (2.1-3.4)2.2 (2.0-4.1)Treatment naiven = 20n = 34n = 812.5 (2.4-12.5)4.3 (3.1-6.4)3.5 (2.1-4.2)OS [NR, not reached.]Totaln = 119n = 161n = 76NR (13.7-NR)8.8 (6.8-12.4)8.8 (5.5-12.0)Previously treatedn = 99n = 127n = 68NR (9.3-NR)7.3 (5.8-12.1)8.6 (5.5-12.0)Treatment naiven = 20n = 34n = 8NR (NR-NR)16.2 (8.6-16.2)10.4 (3.4-NR) Citation Format: Edward B. Garon, Naiyer Rizvi, Rina Hui, Natasha B. Leighl, Ani S. Balmanoukian, Joseph P. Eder, Amita Patnaik, Charu Aggarwal, Matthew A. Gubens, Leora Horn, Enric Carcereny, Myung-Ju Ahn, Enriqueta Felip, Jong-Seok Lee, Jin Zhang, Reshma A. Rangwala, Gregory M. Lubiniecki, Charlotte M. Roach, Kenneth Emancipator, Leena Gandhi. Efficacy of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) and relationship with PD-L1 expression in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: Findings from KEYNOTE-001). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr CT104. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-CT104
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".