The International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) model as a prognostic tool in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients previously treated with first-line targeted therapy (TT).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
398 Background: Prior prognostic models for 2nd-line systemic therapy have not been studied in the setting of contemporary sequential targeted therapy (TT). We sought to validate the IMDC prognostic model in patients with mRCC receiving next-line TT after progression on 1st-line TT. Methods: Patients who received 2nd-line TT after progressing on 1st-line TT for mRCC at 19 centres were analyzed. For the patients who had immunotherapy (22%) prior to their 1st TT, we examined their second TT (ie 3rd-line therapy). The endpoint was median overall survival (OS) since the initiation of 2nd-line therapy. Additionally, we compared the IMDC model with the 3-factor-MSKCC model (Motzer et al JCO 2004) used for previously-treated patients. Results: 1,021 patients treated with a second TT were included. Median time on 2nd-line TT was 3.9 months (range 0-76+). 871 (85%) of patients had stopped 2nd-line TT by the time of analysis. Median OS since 2nd-line TT was 12.5 months (95% CI: 11.3-14.3 months), with 369 (36.1%) of patients remaining alive. 5 out of 6 pre-defined factors in IMDC model (anemia, thrombocytosis, neutrophilia, KPS <80%, and <1 year from diagnosis to treatment) measured at the time of 2nd-line TT were independent predictors of poorer OS (HR between 1.39 and 1.58, p<0.05). Hypercalcemia was not statistically significant in multivariable analysis (p=0.3008) likely due to the low incidence of hypercalcemia (9%). The concordance index using all 6 prognostic factors was 0.70, and was 0.66 with the 3-factor-MSKCC model. When patients were divided into 3 risk categories using IMDC criteria, median OS was 35.8 months (95% CI 28.3-47.8) in the favorable risk group (n=76), 16.6 months (95% CI 14.9-17.9) in the intermediate risk group (n=529), and 5.4 months (95% CI 4.7-6.8) in the poor risk group (n=261). Conclusions: The IMDC prognostic model has been validated in and can be applied to patients previously treated with TT, in addition to previously validated populations in 1st-line TT and non-clear cell setting.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".