KEYNOTE-240: Randomized phase III study of pembrolizumab versus best supportive care for second-line advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS503 Background: There are no approved therapies for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after disease progression on sorafenib, or for patients with intolerance to sorafenib. HCC often arises in the background of chronic inflammation and is also associated with an immunosuppressed microenvironment, providing a strong rationale to evaluate immunotherapy in HCC. The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02702401) was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of the anti–PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab + best supportive care (BSC) vs placebo + BSC in patients with previously treated advanced HCC. Methods: Eligibility criteria include age ≥18 years, confirmed diagnosis of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage C disease or BCLC stage B disease not amenable to or refractory to locoregional therapy, disease not amenable to a curative treatment approach (eg, transplantation, surgery, or ablation), documented progression after treatment with sorafenib or intolerance to sorafenib, Child-Pugh liver score A, and ECOG performance status 0-1. ~408 patients will be randomly assigned 2:1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks (Q3W) + BSC or placebo Q3W + BSC for up to 35 cycles or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Randomization will be stratified by geographic region, macrovascular invasion, and α-fetoprotein. BSC will be provided by the investigator per local treatment practices. Response will be assessed every 6 weeks per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review. Adverse events (AEs) will be assessed throughout treatment and for 30 days thereafter (90 days for serious AEs) and graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. Primary objectives are comparison of progression-free survival per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review and overall survival between treatment arms. Secondary objectives are comparison of objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate, and time to progression per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging vendor review, and evaluation of safety and tolerability. Enrollment in KEYNOTE-240 is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02702401.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".