MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623329013 · doi:10.1002/hon.2438_50

PHASE 1B STUDY OF PEMBROLIZUMAB IN PATIENTS WITH RELAPSED/REFRACTORY PRIMARY MEDIASTINAL LARGE <scp>B</scp>‐CELL LYMPHOMA (<scp>RRPMBCL</scp>): UPDATED RESULTS FROM THE <scp>KEYNOTE</scp>‐013 TRIAL

2017· article· en· W2623329013 on OpenAlexaff
Pier Luigi Zinzani, Vincent Ribrag, Craig H. Moskowitz, Jean‐Marie Michot, John Kuruvilla, Nancy L. Bartlett, Arun Balakumaran, Arkendu Chatterjee, Sabine Chlosta, Margaret A. Shipp, Philippe Armand

Bibliographic record

VenueHematological Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityNeutropeniaInternal medicinePembrolizumabRegimenAdverse effectPopulationCohortRefractory (planetary science)SurgeryOncologyGastroenterologyToxicityCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Current treatments for rrPMBCL often yield poor outcomes, but PMBCL's genetics may make it susceptible to PD-1 blockade. The multicenter, multicohort KEYNOTE-013 (NCT01953692) phase 1b trial evaluates safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody pembrolizumab in patients (pts) with hematologic malignancies. Methods: An independent cohort of KEYNOTE-013 is enrolling PMBCL pts who relapsed after or are ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplant (SCT). Pts initially received pembrolizumab IV 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W), later changed to an equivalent regimen of 200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W). Treatment continues for 2 years or until unacceptable toxicity or confirmed disease progression. Treatment response is radiographically evaluated using 2007 response criteria at week 6, 12, and every 9 weeks thereafter. Primary end points were safety and objective response rate (ORR). Safety population: all pts with ≥1 dose of study drug. Efficacy population: all pts who progress prior to or reach the first efficacy evaluation. Results: By the analysis cutoff date (January 3, 2017), 22 pts had been enrolled in the PMBCL cohort, 21 were treated, and 19 were radiographically evaluable. Overall, 67% of pts had ≥3 prior lines of therapy, and 67% were ineligible for autologous SCT due to chemorefractory disease. Median follow-up duration was 14.3 months (range, 0.6 to 34.7 months). In the safety population, 14 pts (67%) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs): 4 pts with grade 3 TRAEs (neutropenia n = 2, fatigue n = 1, increased alanine aminotransferase n = 1) and 1 with a grade 4 TRAE (neutropenia). An additional patient had grade 4 venoocclusive liver disease after allogeneic SCT during the follow-up period after pembrolizumab discontinuation. Seven pts had serious AEs. There were no treatment-related deaths. In the efficacy population (19 evaluable pts and 1 with clinical progression before the first efficacy evaluation), ORR was 50%: 5 pts (25%) each achieved partial or complete response (CR). Five others (25%) had stable disease as best response. Of evaluable pts, 15 (79%) had target lesion reductions (Figure). Median duration of response (DOR) was not reached (range, 1.4 to 28.9 months); DOR in pts with CR ranged from 1.4 to 27.1 months. There were 8 ongoing responses, including 5 in pts who discontinued treatment. Seventeen pts discontinued treatment due to progressive disease on imaging (n = 7), clinical progression (n = 5), physician decision (n = 2), patient decision, CR, or AE (n = 1 each); 2 pts were discontinued after completing the maximum 2 years of treatment and remain in remission. Keywords: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL); salvage treatment

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHematological OncologySame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207