MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nivolumab (NIVO) + ipilimumab (IPI) combination therapy in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC): Subgroup analyses from CheckMate 040.

2020· article· en· W3004517814 on OpenAlexaff
Aiwu Ruth He, Thomas Yau, Chiun Hsu, Yoon‐Koo Kang, Tae‐You Kim, Armando Santoro, Bruno Sangro, Ignacio Melero, Masatoshi Kudo, Ming‐Mo Hou, Ana Matilla, Francesco Tovoli, Jennifer J. Knox, Bassel F. El‐Rayes, Mirelis Acosta-Rivera, Jaclyn Neely, Yun Shen, Marina Tschaika, Anthony B. El-Khoueiry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineTolerabilityClinical endpointNivolumabSorafenibOncologyHepatocellular carcinomaClinical trialAdverse effectCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

512 Background: NIVO monotherapy is approved in the United States and other countries for pts with HCC treated with sorafenib (SOR) based on CheckMate 040 (NCT01658878) results, which reported 14% objective response rate (ORR) and 16-month median overall survival (mOS; El-Khoueiry et al. Lancet 2017). Primary efficacy and safety of NIVO + IPI in pts with aHCC previously treated with SOR were presented recently (Yau et al. J Clin Oncol 2019). Here, we will present subgroup analyses from this study. Methods: Pts were randomized to 3 arms: [A] NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg Q3W (4 doses) or [B] NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W (4 doses), each followed by NIVO 240 mg Q2W, or [C] NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W. Treatment continued until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. Primary endpoints included safety/tolerability, ORR, and duration of response (DOR; investigator assessment per RECIST v1.1). Key secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), OS, and progression-free survival (blinded independent central review [BICR] per RECIST v1.1); key exploratory endpoints included ORR (BICR per RECIST v1.1). Data cutoff was January 2019. Results: A total of 148 pts were randomized. Minimum OS follow-up from last pt randomization date to data cutoff was 28 months. At baseline, 34% of all pts had vascular invasion; 82% had extrahepatic spread; and 91% had Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage C; 84% discontinued SOR because of disease progression and 14% because of toxicity. For all treated pts, ORR was 31% (7 had complete response), with median DOR of 17 months; DCR was 49%; the 30-month OS rate was 37%. NIVO + IPI was well tolerated; 38% of pts had grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs; most common any grade: pruritus and rash; most common grade 3–4: aspartate aminotransferase increase and lipase increase); 5% had grade 3–4 TRAEs leading to discontinuation. Subgroup analyses based on duration of prior SOR therapy and other pt characteristics will be presented. Conclusions: NIVO + IPI led to clinically meaningful benefits, with a manageable safety profile in pts previously treated with SOR. NIVO + IPI may provide a new treatment option for these pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01658878.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.010
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations37
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207