MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397191612 · doi:10.1097/cmr.0000000000000175

A phase 2 study of tremelimumab in patients with advanced uveal melanoma

2015· article· en· W2397191612 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony M. Joshua, Jose Gerard Monzon, Catalin Mihalcioiu, David Hogg, Michael Smylie, Tina Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueMelanoma Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreOccupational Cancer Research CentreRoyal Victoria HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersPfizer
KeywordsTremelimumabMedicineClinical endpointInterim analysisInternal medicineConfidence intervalPhases of clinical researchMelanomaImmunotherapyOncologyClinical trialIpilimumabSurgeryGastroenterologyCancerCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Similar to cutaneous melanoma, several strategies of immune escape have been documented in uveal melanomas (UMs). We hypothesized that these cancers could respond to cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibition with tremelimumab by potentiating T-cell activation. This was an open-label, multicentre phase 2 study in patients with advanced UM who had not received prior immunotherapy. Patient received tremelimumab at 15 mg/kg administered every 90 days for up to four cycles. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were safety, durable response rate, objective response rate, duration of objective response, duration of complete response, and median overall survival (OS). Eleven patients, all with M1c disease, were enrolled with no responses observed. The median follow-up was 11 months (range 2-36 months). The median PFS was 2.9 months (95% confidence interval 2.8-3.0) and the 6-month PFS rate was 9.1%. The median OS was 12.8 months (95% confidence interval 3.8-19.7). Toxicities were consistent with CTLA-4 blockade and were manageable. Although the median OS of 12.8 months and the manageable toxicity profile of tremelimumab observed in this study seem promising, the modest 6-month PFS and the lack of responses observed resulted in the study being stopped due to futility at the first interim stage. To date, no systemic treatment has demonstrated a survival benefit in patients with advanced UM. The standard treatment for patients with advanced UM should be a clinical trial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations104
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMelanoma ResearchSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207