MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Circulating tumor DNA dynamics as prognostic and predictive biomarkers of response to pembrolizumab in patients with virally-related tumors (VRT) treated within the INSPIRE study.

2020· article· en· W3031795832 on OpenAlexaff
M. Oliva Bernal, Zhihui Liu, Marco Iafolla, Anna Spreafico, Sarah Jennings, Albiruni Ryan Abdul Razak, Cindy Yang, Scott V. Bratman, Dax Torti, Trevor J. Pugh, Lillian L. Siu, Aaron R. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchUniversity of AlbertaUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabInternal medicineOncologyCohortResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsNasopharyngeal carcinomaHead and neck cancerProgression-free survivalConfidence intervalPathologyCancerOverall survivalImmunotherapyProgressive diseaseRadiation therapyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3068 Background: We previously showed a correlation between circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) dynamics and response to pembrolizumab in a cohort of mixed tumors treated in the INSPIRE study (Yang et al, ESMO 2019). We investigated the prognostic and predictive value of ctDNA dynamics in patients (pts) with VRT. Methods: Pts with VRT (HPV+ squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), EBER+ nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and MCPyV+ Merkel carcinoma (MC)) and a control cohort of non-VRT (HPV- head and neck SCC) treated with single-agent pembrolizumab were selected for the analysis. ctDNA was assayed at baseline and start of cycle 3 using a pt-specific amplicon-based NGS assay (Signatera). Samples were considered ctDNA positive if ≥2 of 16 pt-specific targets met the qualifying confidence score threshold. Whole exome sequencing (WES) performed in baseline tumor tissue; presence of HPV, EBV and MCPyV in tumor determined through bioinformatic analysis of WES data (VirusFinder, PMID23717618). Changes in tumor size (mm) and response data using RECIST 1.1 were collected. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Twenty pts with VRT (HPV+ head and neck = 8, cervical = 2 and anal = 2 SCC; EBER+NPC = 2; MC = 6) and 11 pts with non-VRT were included. Median follow-up: 11 months (0,5-11). Treatment response: VRT 6 responders (CR + PR + SD > 18weeks) and 14 non-responders (SD < 18 weeks + PD); non-VRT 3 responders and 8 non-responders. Median OS and PFS for all pts were 10.61 and 3.2 months, respectively. No differences in PFS (p = 0.60) nor OS (p = 0.66) were observed among responders between VRT and non-VRT. Among non-responders, VRT had significantly higher OS but not PFS when compared to non-VRT (HR 0.30, p = 0.01 and HR 0.82 p = 0.62, respectively). VRT had quantitatively higher ctDNA at baseline vs non-VRT (Mean 7.9 vs 0.4 ng, p < 0.001). ΔctDNA (Change in ctDNA between baseline and cycle 3) strongly correlated with changes in tumor measurements and response by RECIST 1.1 (Spearman Rho = 0.75) and was associated with survival regardless of viral status (Table). Conclusions: ΔctDNA strongly correlated with changes in tumor response and survival in both VRT and non-VRT. Higher baseline ctDNA was found in VRT. Correlation with circulating viral DNA and radiomics analyses is on-going. [Table: see text]

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 topicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→