MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529040040 · doi:10.1038/bjc.2016.308

Patterns of response to anti-PD-1 treatment: an exploratory comparison of four radiological response criteria and associations with overall survival in metastatic melanoma patients

2016· article· en· W2529040040 on OpenAlexafffund
Leila Khoja, Minnie Kibiro, Ur Metser, Craig Gedye, David Hogg, Marcus O. Butler, Eshetu G. Atenafu, Anthony M. Joshua

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicinePembrolizumabComplete responseRadiological weaponResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsOncologyHazard ratioImmunotherapyMelanomaLung cancerProportional hazards modelProgressive diseaseCancerSurgeryChemotherapyConfidence intervalCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiological assessment of response to checkpoint inhibitors remains imperfect. We evaluated individual lesion and inter-patient response by response evaluation (RECIST) 1.1, immune-related response criteria (irRC), CHOI and modified CHOI (mCHOI) and correlated response with overall survival (OS). Thirty-seven patients with 567 measurable lesions treated with pembrolizumab in the Keynote 001 trial were studied. Association of response with OS was determined. Response varied according to site; lung lesions had the highest rate of complete response (69 out of 163 (42%) vs other sites 71 out of 404 (18%), P <0.0001). Delayed response post first scan was seen in 2 out of 37 (5%) deemed progressive (PD) by RECIST and 2 out of 14 (14%) deemed PD by irRC. Modified CHOI criteria showed response of 38% (14 out of 37). Change in tumour size and density on first follow-up assessment was associated with OS with each 1000 mm 2 increase in tumour size from baseline increasing the hazard of dying by 25.9% (HR=1.259, (95% CI=1.116–1.420), P =0.0002). Similarly, each 20HU increase in density increased the HR by 15% (HR=1.15, (95% CI 1.045–1.260), P =0.004). Response defined by any criteria had superior OS (CHOI P =0.0084; mCHOI P =0.0183; irRC P <0.0001 and RECIST P =0.0003). Response by any criterion was prognostic. Novel patterns of response and changes on treatment in tumour density suggest complex anti-tumour responses to immunotherapy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations63
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207