MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract CT289: Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib vs docetaxel in patients with previously treated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and PD after platinum-doublet chemotherapy and immunotherapy: Phase 3, randomized, open-label LEAP-008 trial

2020· article· en· W3083362003 on OpenAlexaff
Natasha B. Leighl, Rina Hui, Delvys Rodríguez‐Abreu, Makoto Nishio, Matthew D. Hellmann, Chooi Lee, Xuan Deng, Debra Kush, Hossein Borghaei, Justin F. Gainor

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLenvatinibMedicinePembrolizumabDocetaxelInternal medicineOncologyChemotherapyTolerabilityLung cancerCancerImmunotherapyAdverse effectThyroid cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Pembrolizumab is approved for patients with metastatic NSCLC and PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥1%. The multireceptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor lenvatinib enhances antitumor activity of PD-1 inhibitors in vitro and has shown clinical activity with pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic NSCLC (NCT02501096). LEAP-008 (NCT03976375) evaluates the efficacy and safety of second/subsequent-line pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib vs docetaxel in patients with previously treated metastatic NSCLC refractory to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy and platinum-doublet chemotherapy. Methods: In this randomized, global, open-label, active-controlled study, patients (n = 405) with metastatic NSCLC who progressed after platinum-doublet chemotherapy and anti-PD-(L)1 therapy are randomized 4:4:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W plus lenvatinib 20 mg once daily (Arm 1, n = 180), docetaxel 75 mg/m2 Q3W (Arm 2, n = 180), or lenvatinib 24 mg once daily (Arm 3, n = 45). Patients are stratified by anti-PD-(L)1 therapy sequencing (immediate prior therapy vs not immediate prior therapy), PD-L1 TPS (<50% vs ≥50%), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0 vs 1). Treatment continues until PD, unacceptable AEs, concurrent illness preventing study drug administration, investigator decision, or patient withdrawal. Blood pressure is regularly assessed and, if elevated, anti-hypertensive medications are administered and lenvatinib may be withheld and resumed, with or without dose reduction, or discontinued per protocol. Imaging is assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 Q6W from randomization until week 36, then Q9W until week 54, then Q12W until PD or start of new anti-cancer regimen. Dual primary outcomes are OS and PFS (RECIST version 1.1 by BICR). Secondary outcomes include ORR (RECIST version 1.1 by BICR), duration of response (RECIST version 1.1 by BICR), safety (AEs graded by National Cancer Institute Common Terminology for Adverse Events version 4.0), and quality of life (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and Lung Cancer Module 13). PFS and OS will be analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and stratified log-rank test; differences in ORR will be analyzed by the Miettinen and Nurminen method. Citation Format: Natasha B. Leighl, Rina Hui, Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu, Makoto Nishio, Matthew D. Hellmann, Chooi Lee, Xuan Deng, Debra Kush, Hossein Borghaei, Justin Gainor. Pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib vs docetaxel in patients with previously treated metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and PD after platinum-doublet chemotherapy and immunotherapy: Phase 3, randomized, open-label LEAP-008 trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research 2020; 2020 Apr 27-28 and Jun 22-24. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(16 Suppl):Abstract nr CT289.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207