MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Avelumab treatment in metastatic urothelial carcinoma: Association between early response and durable outcomes in the phase Ib JAVELIN Solid Tumor Study.

2019· article· en· W2921911282 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manish R. Patel, James L. Gulley, Keun‐Wook Lee, Jeffrey R. Infante, Juliane Manitz, Vijay Kasturi, Hao Zhang, Galit Rosen, Andrea B. Apolo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAvelumabMedicineMetastatic Urothelial CarcinomaJavelinInternal medicineResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsOncologyChemotherapyUrothelial carcinomaPhases of clinical researchImmunotherapyCancerPembrolizumabBladder cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

429 Background: Avelumab is a human anti‒PD-L1 IgG1 antibody approved in the US, Canada, and Israel for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) progressed after platinum chemotherapy. In the JAVELIN Solid Tumor study, avelumab treatment in post-platinum patients (pts) has shown promising and durable antitumor activity and favorable overall survival (OS) outcomes. Here, we report post hoc analyses to assess if early response to avelumab is associated with long-term treatment outcomes. Methods: Pts with mUC that had progressed after platinum-based therapy in the JAVELIN Solid Tumor study were analyzed. Tumors were assessed every 6 weeks by independent review (RECIST v1.1). A Kaplan-Meier subgroup analysis has been performed for duration of response (DOR); response by week 7 (first tumor scan ± 5 days) define balanced subgroups. A landmark analysis was used to assess the association between time-to-response and OS. The landmark was 3 mo (second tumor assessment; 12 weeks ± 5 days). Results: 242 pts with platinum-treated mUC received avelumab and were followed up for ≥2 years (median, 2.7 years; data cutoff, Apr 2018). No difference in DOR was found between pts who had responded by the first tumor assessment (n=15) and those who responded later (n=25; HR, 0.8 [95% CI: 0.3-2.0]). In a landmark analysis for OS, the median OS was not reached (NR [95% CI: 18.9 mo-NR]) in pts who had responded within 3 mo (n=29) compared with 9.5 mo (95% CI: 6.5-14.4) in pts with late response or stable disease (n=74), and 4.3 mo (95% CI: 2.8-7.1) in other pts (progressive disease [PD] or not evaluable; n=70). Further sensitivity analyses found that survival did not vary between pts who continued treatment beyond investigator-confirmed PD (n=46) vs those that did not (n=24; median survival, 5.0 mo [95% CI: 2.8-8.8] vs 4.3 mo [95% CI: 0.9-8.3], respectively). Conclusions: Responses to avelumab have similar durability irrespective of time to response. Pts with an early response to avelumab tend to survive longer than pts with stable disease, and both groups have longer OS than nonresponders. Clinical trial information: NCT01772004.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→