Final efficacy results of NCIC CTG IND.202: A randomized phase II study of recombinant interleukin-21 (rIL21) in patients with recurrent or metastatic melanoma (MM).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
9032 Background: rIL21 is a T-cell derived cytokine with antitumor activity dependent on NK cells or CD8+ T cells through induction of central and effector memory cells. A previous phase II study demonstrated an ORR of 22.5% in previously untreated patients with MM. We conducted a multicentre randomized phase II study of MM evaluating the efficacy, toxicity, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and biomarkers of rIL21 versus dacarbazine (DTIC). Methods: Eligible patients: Recurrent or MM, with either maximum tumour lesion size of < 50 mm or LDH < 2.5 x ULN and prior therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors allowed. Patients were treated with either rIL-21, 30 µg /kg/day dose IV daily x 5 days weeks 1, 3, 5 q 8 weeks or dacarbazine (DTIC) 1000 mg/m2 IV q 3 weeks. The primary objective was to compare progression free survival (PFS). The trial was designed to detect a hazard ratio of 1.75 with one-sided alpha of 0.1; 58 progression events were required to provide 80% power. Results: 64 patients were randomized, 32 in the rIL-21 arm and 32 in the DTIC arm. The Table summarizes key demographic and efficacy endpoints. Common rIl21 related adverse events were fatigue, rash, diarrhea, nausea, myalgia and elevated liver enzymes. At least one dose reduction/ interruption or discontinuation occurred in 32 (100%) and 27 (96.4%) of rIL21 and DTIC patients. Conclusions: Despite encouraging efficacy in prior phase I/II studies, the results suggest that rIL-21 is comparable to DTIC in this patient population. Additional biomarker analysis from this study is pending and combination studies are currently ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT00514085. [Table: see text]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".