Treating Japanese Patients With Pembrolizumab for Platinum-Refractory Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma in Real-World Clinical Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since December 2017, pembrolizumab has been approved in Japan as a second-line treatment for radical unresectable urothelial carcinoma (UC) that has become exacerbated after chemotherapy by the international randomized phase 3 trial, KEYNOTE-045. The aim of this study was to evaluate the oncological efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy in Japanese patients with advanced UC in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: A total of 34 patients who received pembrolizumab after the failure of platinum-based chemotherapy for advanced urothelial carcinoma at four institutions between January 2018 and August 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. In all patients, UC was histopathologically diagnosed, and disease progression after platinum-based chemotherapy was radiologically confirmed. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 7.7 months. The objective response rate, median progression-free survival, and median overall survival were 20.6%, 3.3 months, and 11.7 months, respectively. Regarding the toxicities associated with pembrolizumab, adverse events (AEs) of any grade occurred in 61.8%, and grade 3 AEs occurred in 23.5%; grade ≥ 4 AEs did not occur in any patients. Univariate analyses revealed that the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, liver metastases, and time from previous chemotherapy were prognostic variables. Multivariate analyses revealed that liver metastases (positive: hazard ratio, 4.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.48 - 12.08; P < 0.01) and time from previous chemotherapy (≥ 3 months: hazard ratio, 5.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.43 - 17.91; P = 0.01) were independent prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world clinical study, these findings concerning the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab for advanced UC in Japanese patients were comparable to those of the open-label, international, phase 3 trial KEYNOTE-045. Liver metastases and time from previous chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors in the present study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".