MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Overall survival (OS) analysis from an expanded access program (EAP) of nivolumab (NIVO) in combination with ipilimumab (IPI) in patients with advanced melanoma (MEL).

2017· article· en· W2891694121 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Hogg, Paul B. Chapman, Mario Sznol, Christopher D. Lao, René González, Gregory A. Daniels, Michael Smylie, Ragini R. Kudchadkar, John A. Thompson, William H. Sharfman, Michael B. Atkins, Anna C. Pavlick, Joel Jiang, Alexandre Avila, Sheena Demelo, F. Stephen Hodi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIpilimumabNivolumabInternal medicineCohortExpanded accessOncologyCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9522 Background: NIVO (anti-PD-1) and IPI (anti-CTLA-4), alone and in combination, are approved for the treatment of MEL. Phase II and III trials showed improved efficacy for NIVO+IPI versus IPI alone, but with a higher frequency of adverse events (AEs). In the phase II CheckMate 069 trial, the 2-year OS rate was 63.8% for all patients (pts) in the NIVO+IPI group. We report the first OS analysis, as well as updated safety data, from a North American EAP of NIVO+IPI in pts with MEL (CheckMate 218; NCT02186249). Methods: CheckMate 218 included pts with MEL who could have progressed on other therapies, but were anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 treatment-naive. Pts received NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg Q3W x 4, followed by NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W until disease progression or a maximum of 48 weeks from the first monotherapy dose. We assessed OS in the US cohort (n = 580) and safety in all pts (n = 732). Pts were followed for a minimum of 1 year in the USA and 6 months in Canada. Results: Of 732 pts, 43% had a BRAFmutation, 84% stage IV MEL, 51% M1c disease, 31% LDH > ULN (9% LDH > 2x ULN), and 13% received ≥1 prior systemic therapy in the metastatic setting. All pts received a median of 3 doses each for NIVO (range: 1–4) and IPI (range: 0–4) in the induction phase; 34% of pts received at least 1 dose of NIVO maintenance. The 1- and 2-year OS rates were 78.6% (95% CI: 74.2–82.4) and 65.3% (95% CI: 56.1–73.0), respectively. AEs of any grade occurred in 717 pts (98%), with grade 3/4 AEs in 470 pts (64%). Immune-modulating medications were used to manage any grade AEs, including grade 1/2 skin and gastrointestinal AEs, in 538 of 717 pts (75%), and to manage grade 3/4 AEs in 279 of 470 pts (59%). The most common treatment-related AEs of any grade were diarrhea (39%), pruritus (26%), and an increase in aspartate aminotransferase level (23%). Treatment-related deaths in 2 pts were reported as drug-induced liver injury and myocardial infarction. Conclusions: In this EAP, which included pts who had received prior systemic therapies for MEL and pts with poor prognostic factors generally not included in clinical trials, NIVO+IPI treatment demonstrated survival outcomes and a safety profile consistent with clinical trial data. Clinical trial information: NCT02186249.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→