MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

SWOG S1400F (NCT03373760): A phase II study of durvalumab plus tremelimumab for previously treated patients with acquired resistance to PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor therapy and stage IV squamous cell lung cancer (Lung-MAP Sub-study).

2020· article· en· W3029353272 on OpenAlexaff
Natasha B. Leighl, Mary W. Redman, Naiyer A. Rizvi, Fred R. Hirsch, Philip C. Mack, Lawrence H. Schwartz, James L. Wade, William Irvin, Sreekanth Reddy, Jeffrey Crawford, Jeffrey D. Bradley, Tom Stinchcombe, Suresh S. Ramalingam, Jieling Miao, Katherine Minichiello, David R. Gandara, Roy S. Herbst, Vassiliki A. Papadimitrakopoulou, Karen Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Institutes of HealthAmgen
KeywordsMedicineTremelimumabDurvalumabInternal medicineLung cancerClinical endpointOncologyCohortResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsInterim analysisProgressive diseaseCombination therapyCancerSurgeryImmunotherapyGastroenterologyChemotherapyClinical trialNivolumabIpilimumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9623 Background: The Lung Cancer Master Protocol (Lung-MAP) is designed to evaluate novel targeted therapies in patients with advanced squamous lung carcinoma. In the S1400F sub-study (non-match), we tested whether combined CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibition with durvalumab plus tremelimumab (D+T) could overcome primary or acquired resistance to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy. Response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival, and safety in the acquired resistance cohort are reported herein. Methods: Patients with previously treated squamous lung carcinoma, performance status (PS) 0-1, and adequate organ function that developed disease progression after ≥24 weeks of anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy were eligible. Prior severe immune-related toxicities, intervening systemic therapy and combination chemo-immunotherapy were not permitted. Patients received D1500 mg + T75 mg IV q28 days for 4 cycles then D maintenance until disease progression. The primary endpoint was best objective response (RECIST 1.1). Interim analysis for futility was planned after 20 patients evaluable for response were enrolled. If no responses were observed, the cohort would stop enrolment. Results: 30 eligible patients were accrued to the acquired resistance cohort. Median age was 68 years, 60% of patients were male, 33% PS 0 and had received a median of 2 prior lines of therapy (maximum 4). Best response to prior anti-PD-(L)1 therapy was CR/PR/SD in 3/7/20 patients, with a median duration of anti-PD-(L)1 therapy of 8.6 months (5.2-30.4). No objective responses were seen with D+T; 47% had SD as best response. Median PFS was 2.0 months (95% CI 1.6-2.9) and survival 7.5 months (95% CI 5.3-8.7). Among the 14 patients with SD as best response, the median PFS calculated from first disease assessment is 2.8 months (95% CI: 1.4-3.9). Grade≥3 adverse events at least possibly related to protocol therapy were seen in 10/30 patients. These include 1 treatment-related death due to pneumonitis and 1 death not otherwise specified. Other adverse events include grade 3 confusion (1), dehydration (2), diarrhea (3), encephalopathy (1), weakness (1), hyperglycemia (1), hypoxia (1), lymphopenia (1), nausea, (1), neutropenia (1), thrombocytopenia (1), rash (1), vomiting (1), grade 4 dyspnea (1), leucopenia (1) and lymphopenia (1). Conclusions: D+T did not demonstrate activity in patients with acquired resistance to PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors and pretreated advanced squamous lung carcinoma. Clinical trial information: NCT03373760 .

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→