MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase 3 KEYNOTE-361 trial: Pembrolizumab (pembro) with or without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in advanced urothelial cancer.

2017· article· en· W2808040186 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Powles, Juergen E. Gschwend, Yohann Loriot, Joaquim Bellmunt, Lajos Géczi, Christof Vulsteke, Mahmoud Abdelsalam, Rustem Gafanov, Woo Kyun Bae, János Révész, Yoshiaki Yamamoto, Urbano Anido, Wen-Pin Su, Mark T. Fleming, Maurice Markus, Dai Feng, Christian Poehlein, Ajjai Alva

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMoncton Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGemcitabineMedicineChemotherapyCarboplatinUrothelial cancerCisplatinPembrolizumabOncologyDocetaxelBladder cancerMetastatic Urothelial CarcinomaInternal medicineCancerUrothelial carcinomaImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS4590 Background: Only 5%-15% of patients (pts) with advanced bladder cancer attain long-term survival with standard first-line cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Programmed death 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 inhibitors have proven effective in recurrent, advanced urothelial cancer. Emerging data suggest these agents may also be useful in the first-line setting. In KEYNOTE-052, first-line pembro, an anti–PD-1 antibody, demonstrated antitumor activity and acceptable safety in cisplatin-ineligible pts with advanced urothelial cancer. KEYNOTE-361 (NCT02853305) is a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study of pembro with or without chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in pts with advanced urothelial carcinoma. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include age ≥18 years; histologically or cytologically confirmed unresectable/metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis, ureter, bladder, or urethra; measurable disease (RECIST v1.1, investigator review); no prior systemic chemotherapy ([neo]adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy with recurrence > 12 months after completion is allowed); ECOG PS 0-2; and provision of a tumor sample for biomarker analyses. Pts will be randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive pembro 200 mg every 3 weeks (Q3W), pembro + investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (gemcitabine [1000 mg/m2 on day 1 and 8 Q3W] + cisplatin [70 mg/m2 Q3W]), or chemotherapy alone. Cisplatin-ineligible pts randomly assigned to chemotherapy will receive gemcitabine + carboplatin [AUC 5 Q3W]. Chemotherapy choice must be selected before randomization. Treatment will continue until progressive disease, unacceptable adverse events (AEs), or 35 cycles of pembro (pembro arms only). Response will be assessed Q9W for the first year and Q12W thereafter. AEs will be evaluated throughout and graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. Primary end points are progression-free survival (RECIST v1.1 per central review) and overall survival; secondary end points include objective response rate and safety and tolerability. Efficacy outcomes will be compared for pembro vs chemotherapy and pembro + chemotherapy vs chemotherapy. Enrollment is ongoing; ~990 pts will be enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT02853305.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations47
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207