MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Results of KEYNOTE-240: phase 3 study of pembrolizumab (Pembro) vs best supportive care (BSC) for second line therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

2019· article· en· W2947072948 on OpenAlexaff
Richard S. Finn, Baek‐Yeol Ryoo, Philippe Merle, Masatoshi Kudo, Mohamed Bouattour, Ho-Yeong Lim, В. В. Бредер, Julien Edeline, Yee Chao, Sadahisa Ogasawara, Thomas Yau, Marcelo Garrido, Stephen L. Chan, Jennifer J. Knox, Bruno Daniele, Scot Ebbinghaus, Erluo Chen, Abby B. Siegel, Andrew X. Zhu, Ann‐Lii Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSorafenibMallinckrodtClinical trialPlaceboPhases of clinical researchInternal medicineSurgeryFamily medicineHepatocellular carcinomaAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4004 Background: Pembro received accelerated approval based on results of KEYNOTE-224, a phase 2 trial in pts with advanced HCC in the second line setting. KEYNOTE-240 (NCT02702401) was a randomized, placebo (Pbo) controlled, phase 3 study of Pembro vs BSC in pts with previously treated advanced HCC. Methods: Eligible pts had a radiographic or pathologic diagnosis of HCC, radiographic progression on/intolerance to sorafenib, Child-Pugh A disease and ECOG PS 0-1. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive Pembro 200 mg + BSC or Pbo + BSC IV every 3 wk, stratified by geographic region, macrovascular invasion and ɑ-fetoprotein levels for ≤35 cycles or until confirmed PD/unacceptable toxicity. Response was assessed every 6 wk per RECIST v1.1 by central imaging review. Co-primary endpoints were OS and PFS. Secondary endpoints included ORR, DOR and safety. Data cutoff was Jan 2 2019 for OS; Mar 26 2018 for PFS and ORR. Results: 413 patients were randomized; 278 to Pembro and 135 to Pbo. After a median follow up of 13.8 mo, 10.1% of pts remained on Pembro and 3.0% on Pbo. Pembro improved OS (HR: 0.78; one sided p = 0.0238) and PFS (HR: 0.78; one sided p = 0.0209) vs Pbo; these differences did not meet significance per the prespecified statistical plan. ORR was 16.9% (95% CI 12.7-21.8%) for Pembro vs 2.2% (95% CI 0.5-6.4%) for Pbo (nominal one sided p = 0.00001); responses on Pembro were durable (median DOR: 13.8 mo [1.5-23.6+]). Off study, new therapy use was 42% for Pembro and 47% for Pbo. The safety profile including incidence of hepatitis and other immune mediated events was generally consistent with that previously reported in Pembro studies; no cases of HBV/HCV flare were identified. Conclusions: Pembro reduced the risk of death by 22% and improved PFS over Pbo in pts with advanced HCC, although significance was not reached per prespecified statistical criteria. ORR in the Pembro arm was consistent with that of KEYNOTE-224. Subsequent anticancer therapy in the Pbo arm likely impacted the OS results. The safety profile was comparable to that established for Pembro monotherapy. These results are overall consistent with those of KEYNOTE-224 further supporting second line therapy with Pembro in HCC pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02702401.

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)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations210
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisFrench-language works237,207