MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract OT3-04-03: KEYNOTE-756: A randomized, double-blind, phase III study of pembrolizumab versus placebo in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant endocrine therapy for high-risk early-stage ER+/HER2– breast cancer

2019· article· en· W2944795532 on OpenAlexaff
Fátima Cardoso, Aditya Bardia, Fabrice André, DW Cescon, Heather L. McArthur, Melinda L. Telli, Sherene Loi, Javier Cortés, Peter Schmid, Nadia Harbeck, Carsten Denkert, Christian Jackisch, Lin Jia, Konstantinos Tryfonidis, Vassiliki Karantza

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineOncologyAnthracyclineChemotherapyPembrolizumabNeoadjuvant therapyCancerPlaceboPathologyImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background:Although ER+/HER2– breast cancer has a better overall prognosis than other breast cancer subtypes, there is a high-risk subpopulation characterized by high-grade tumors and decreased sensitivity to endocrine therapy, higher responsiveness to chemotherapy and worse prognosis. A large meta-analysis of prospective studies focusing on neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for treatment of stage I-III breast cancer demonstrated that increased pathologic complete response (pCR) rates at surgery were associated with improved survival. This correlation was observed across triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), HER2+ breast cancer, and high-grade HR+/HER2- breast cancer. Specifically, patients with a pCR after NAC had a 5-year event-free survival (EFS) rate of 90%, whereas patients who did not achieve a pCR had a 5-year EFS rate of 60%.Therefore, increasing pCR rates after NAC may have a substantial impact for patients with high-risk early-stage HR+/HER2– breast cancer. KEYNOTE-756 is a global, randomized, double-blind, phase III study of pembrolizumab (vs placebo) + chemotherapy as neoadjuvant treatment, followed by pembrolizumab (vs placebo) plus endocrine therapy as adjuvant treatment for patients with high-risk, early-stage ER+/HER2– breast cancer. Methods: Patients with T1c-2 cN1-2 or T3-4 cN0-2 grade 3 or grade 2 with Ki-67 ≥30%, invasive, ductal ER+/HER2– breast cancerwill be stratified by lymph node involvement (positive vs negative), tumor PD-L1 status (positive vs negative), ER positivity (≥10% vs <10%), and anthracycline dosing schedule (Q3W vs Q2W), and then randomized 1:1 to receive neoadjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W or placebo in combination with paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 QW) for 4 cycles followed by (doxorubicin [60 mg/m2] or epirubicin [100 mg/m2]) plus cyclophosphamide (600 mg/m2) Q2/3W for another 4 cycles. After definitive surgery (± radiation therapy, as indicated), patients will receive adjuvant treatment with pembrolizumab (200 mg Q3W) or placebo for 9 additional administrations, in combination with endocrine therapy, which can be given for up to 10 years. Co-primary end points are pCR rate and EFS. Secondary end points are safety and overall survival. The global study will open in North America and Latin America, Europe, and Asia Pacific in the second half of 2018. Citation Format: Cardoso F, Bardia A, Andre F, Cescon DW, McArthur H, Telli M, Loi S, Cortés J, Schmid P, Harbeck N, Denkert C, Jackisch C, Jia L, Tryfonidis K, Karantza V. KEYNOTE-756: A randomized, double-blind, phase III study of pembrolizumab versus placebo in combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant endocrine therapy for high-risk early-stage ER+/HER2– breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-04-03.

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)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→