KEYNOTE-355: Randomized, double-blind, phase III study of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy versus placebo + chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1000 Background: Pembrolizumab (pembro) monotherapy showed promising antitumor activity and manageable safety in patients (pts) with metastatic TNBC in KEYNOTE-012, -086 and -119. KEYNOTE-355 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518) compared pembro + chemotherapy (chemo) vs placebo (pbo) + chemo for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC. Methods: Pts with ≥6 mo DFI were randomized 2:1 to pembro + chemo (nab-paclitaxel; paclitaxel; or gemcitabine/carboplatin) or pbo + chemo for up to 35 administrations of pembro/pbo or until progression/intolerable toxicity. Pts were stratified by chemo type (taxane vs gemcitabine/carboplatin), PD-L1 status (CPS ≥1 vs <1), and prior (neo)adjuvant treatment with same-class chemo (yes vs no). Dual primary endpoints are PFS (RECIST v1.1, blinded independent central review) and OS by tumor PD-L1 expression (CPS ≥10 and ≥1) and in all pts. PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Stratified log-rank tests were used to assess treatment group differences. HR and 95% CIs were based on a stratified Cox regression model. AEs were monitored throughout the study and graded per NCI CTCAE v4.0. Results: As of Dec 11 2019, median follow-up was 17.5 mo for pembro + chemo (n=566) and 15.5 mo for chemo (n=281). Pembro + chemo significantly improved PFS vs chemo alone in pts with CPS ≥10 tumors (Table), meeting one of the protocol-defined primary objectives. Although the boundary for a statistically significant benefit of pembro + chemo in pts with CPS ≥1 tumors was not met and formal testing in ITT was not performed, the pembro treatment effect increased with PD-L1 enrichment (Table). OS follow-up is ongoing. Grade 3-5 treatment-related AE rates were 68.1% with pembro + chemo (2 deaths) vs 66.9% with chemo (0 deaths); rates of grade 3-4 immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were 5.5% vs 0%. Clinical trial information: NCT02819518 . Conclusion: Pembro combined with several chemo partners showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs chemo alone in pts with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC whose tumors expressed PD-L1 (CPS ≥10). Pembro + chemo was generally well tolerated, with no new safety concerns. [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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".