MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase II study of ABBV-399 (Process II) in patients with C-MET positive stage IV/recurrent lung squamous cell cancer (SCC): LUNG-MAP sub-study S1400K (NCT03574753).

2019· article· en· W2954921349 on OpenAlexaff
Saiama N. Waqar, Mary W. Redman, Susanne M. Arnold, Fred R. Hirsch, Philip C. Mack, Lawrence H. Schwartz, David R. Gandara, Tom Stinchcombe, Natasha B. Leighl, Suresh S. Ramalingam, Saloni H. Tanna, Ryan S. Raddin, Katherine Minichiello, Karen Kelly, Jeffrey D. Bradley, Roy S. Herbst, Vassiliki A. Papadimitrakopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortInternal medicineLung cancerInterim analysisClinical endpointGastroenterologyPneumonitisSurgeryLungClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9075 Background: Lung-MAP is a platform trial to assess targeted therapies in SCC. S1400K was designed to evaluate the response to ABBV-399, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting C-MET, in patients with C-Met positive SCC. Methods: Patients with previously treated SCC with c-MET positive tumors (H score ≥150, Ventana SP44 assay), PS≤1, adequate organ function, peripheral neuropathy ≤ grade (G) 2, edema ≤ G2, albumin ≥3 g/dL, hepatic involvement by tumor < 50%. Patients were enrolled into 2 cohorts: Cohort 1 (immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) naïve) and cohort 2 (ICI refractory). ABBV-399 2.7 mg/kg was administered intravenously over 30 minutes every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response assessments were performed every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was response by RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), response within cohort, duration of response (DoR), and toxicities associated with ABBV-399. Interim analysis was planned after 20 evaluable patients, with ≥ 3 responses needed to continue enrollment. Results: Between 2/15/18 and 10/16/2018, 50 patients (17% of patients screened) were assigned to S1400K, 28 patients enrolled (15 in cohort 1 and 13 in cohort 2), 25 were determined eligible, of whom 23 received ABBV-399 and were assessed for adverse events. There were 3 G5 events (2 pneumonitis, both in cohort 2 and 1 bronchopulmonary hemorrhage) and 4 G3 events. S1400K was temporarily closed on 10/16/2018 for interim analysis and safety concerns, and formally closed on 12/21/2018. Two responses were reported, both in cohort 1 (1 complete and 1 unconfirmed partial response, CR and UPR) for a response rate of 9% (95% CI: 0-20%). The CR remains on treatment at 4 months and DoR for the UPR was 2.3 months. Ten patients had stable disease and disease control rate was 52% (3-73%). The median OS and PFS were 4.7 and 2.4 months. Conclusions: ABBV-399 failed to meet the pre-specified response needed to justify continuing enrollment. Pneumonitis was an unanticipated toxicity observed in patients with SCC with previous immunotherapy exposure. Clinical trial information: NCT03574753.

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)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.444 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations→French-language works237,207→