FRACTION-RCC: Innovative, high-throughput assessment of nivolumab + ipilimumab for treatment-refractory advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
5007 Background: The immuno-oncology (I-O) combination nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) is approved for first-line (1L) and NIVO is approved for second-line treatment post TKI therapy in aRCC. The open-label, randomized, phase 2 Fast Real-Time Assessment of Combination Therapies in Immuno-Oncology (FRACTION-RCC; NCT02996110) platform study has an adaptive design allowing rapid evaluation of I-O therapies, including NIVO+IPI or other investigational combinations. This FRACTION analysis reports preliminary outcomes with NIVO+IPI in aRCC pts after progression on checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Methods: All pts, except 1, had previously received and progressed on checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Pts received NIVO+IPI (NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W ×4, then after 6 weeks, NIVO 480 mg Q4W), up to 2 years or until progression, toxicity, or protocol-specified discontinuation. Primary endpoints were confirmed objective response rate (ORR; per investigator using RECIST v1.1), duration of response (DOR), and progression-free survival probability at week 24. Safety outcomes were reported. Results: 46 pts were randomized to NIVO+IPI. Pts had 0 (n = 1), 1 (n = 10), 2 (n = 12), 3 (n = 10), or ≥4 (n = 13) prior lines of therapy. All pretreated pts had prior anti-PD-(L)1-, none had prior anti-CTLA-4- therapy, and 37 had prior TKI-based therapy; 45 pts progressed on anti-PD-(L)1 as the most recent therapy. Most pts had clear cell aRCC (n = 44). After a median study follow-up of 8.9 months, ORR was 15.2%; no pts achieved complete response and 7 achieved partial response. DOR ranged from 2–19+ months (n = 7); 5 pts had ongoing response. Six of 7 responders had received ≥2 prior lines of therapy. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 36 pts (78.3%; fatigue, rash [both 19.6%], and diarrhea [17.4%] were most common). Grade 3–4 treatment-related AEs were reported in 13 pts (28.3%; diarrhea [8.7%], ↑amylase and ↑lipase [both 6.5%] were most common). Treatment-related immune-mediated AEs of any grade were reported in 22 pts (47.8%; rash [19.6%], diarrhea [17.4%], and ↑alanine aminotransferase [8.7%]). No treatment-related deaths were reported. Updated and expanded results with an additional 3 months of follow-up will be presented. Conclusions: These results suggest that NIVO+IPI may provide durable partial response in some pts with prior progression on checkpoint inhibitors, including some heavily pretreated pts. The safety profile of NIVO+IPI in FRACTION pts was similar to historic data in aRCC with this combination. Clinical trial information: NCT02996110 .
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".