MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase II trial of cytoreductive stereotactic hypofractionated radiotherapy with combination ipilimumab/nivolumab for metastatic kidney cancer (CYTOSHRINK).

2020· article· en· W3007807247 on OpenAlexaff
Aly‐Khan A. Lalani, Anand Swaminath, Gregory R. Pond, Anil Kapoor, William Chu, Jonathan L. Bramson, Michael G. Surette, Mark N. Levine, Sebastién J. Hotte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsPopulation Health Research InstituteOntario Clinical Oncology GroupHealth Sciences CentreMcMaster University Medical CentreSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIpilimumabKidney cancerRenal cell carcinomaNivolumabContraindicationInternal medicineSurgerySunitinibCancerOncologyUrologyImmunotherapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS761 Background: Randomized data from the interferon era demonstrated modest survival benefits of cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Results from SURTIME and CARMENA, conducted in the VEGF-targeted therapy era, have challenged the routine use of upfront CN especially in IMDC intermediate and poor risk patients. Furthermore, the treatment landscape in aRCC now includes first-line combination immunotherapy. Data from the Checkmate-214 trial showed that intermediate/poor risk patients have improved overall survival and objective response rate with ipilimumab and nivolumab (I/N) compared to sunitinib. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) provides a convenient method for cytoreduction of the primary kidney lesion and may induce an ‘abscopal effect’, leading to enhanced systemic anti-tumour immune response. We hypothesize that SBRT to the primary kidney mass in aRCC patients will enhance the efficacy of I/N compared to standard of care I/N alone. Methods: This phase II trial randomizes untreated aRCC patients in a 2:1 fashion to I/N plus SBRT (30-40 Gy in 5 fractions) to the primary kidney mass between cycles 1 and 2 (experimental arm, E), versus standard of care I/N alone (standard arm, S). Eligible patients have biopsy-proven aRCC (any histology), IMDC intermediate/poor risk disease, and who decline or are unsuitable for CN. Patients with a primary kidney lesion ≥ 20cm, previous abdominal radiation precluding SBRT, or who have a contraindication to I/N are excluded. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of I/N plus SBRT versus I/N alone, as determined by the hazard ratio for progression free survival (PFS). Secondary objectives include evaluation of safety, overall survival, objective response rate, and health-related quality of life. Exploratory analyses include blood immune signatures and stool microbiome. Up to 78 patients will be enrolled under the assumption of an improved 12-month PFS from 50% (S) to 75% (E), using a two-sided α=0.1, power=80%, and accounting for loss-to-follow-up and stratification using IMDC criteria 1-2 vs 3-6. Clinical trial information: NCT04090710.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207