MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) treatment in special populations of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

2020· article· en· W3008273616 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Vilarim Araújo, Eoghan Malone, Adrian G. Sacher, Nazanin Fallah‐Rad, Srikala S. Sridhar, Aaron R. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCreatinineRenal cell carcinomaRenal functionInternal medicineUrologyOncologyGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

673 Background: Immunotherapies involving a PD-1/PD-L1 immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) are highly effective treatments for mRCC and are now standard of care. Nevertheless, special populations such as patients (pts) with renal impairment (RI) and elderly age were either excluded or underrepresented in registration trials. Here we investigate the efficacy of ICI in mRCC with RI and age above 70 years (yrs). Methods: We utilized the mRCC Princess Margaret database to select pts treated with an ICI agent from May 2005 to May 2018. Renal impairment (RI) was defined as a baseline creatinine > 1.5 ULN or clearance of creatinine < 40 mL/min. Pts were classified as elderly if their age was over 70yrs at the time of ICI initiation. Descriptive statistics and survival analysis were performed. Results: Of 387 pts, 74 received an ICI agent or combination. Mean age was 61yrs and median creatinine was 105 umol/L. Fifty-four pts (73%) were treated with single agent PD-1/PD-L1 ICI and 46 (62%) received treatment as 2nd line. Respectively, 19 (26%), 43 (58%) and 12 (16%) pts were classified as International Metastatic RCC Database Criteria (IMDC) prognostic groups good, intermediate and poor. Of 73 pts with available creatinine levels, 7 (9.5%) were classified as having RI. Ten pts (13.5%) were > 70yrs. Despite not statistically different, pts with RI had worse median overall survival (OS) compared to pts without RI: 7.8 months (m) vs. 28.3m (p=.10). There was no OS difference between pts > 70yrs compared to ≤ 70yrs: not reached (NR) vs. 28m (p=.65). Both RI and elderly patients had no differences in distribution of IMDC prognostic groups compared controls. Conclusions: RI was associated with a non-statistical detriment in OS of mRCC treated with ICI. RI may be a surrogate for comorbid factors that impact OS and needs further analysis in a larger patient sample. Age does not affect ICI efficacy in our cohort. Larger studies to confirm our findings in these special populations are necessary.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→