MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract LB-397: Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum vs placebo plus pemetrexed and platinum as first-line therapy for metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC: analysis of KEYNOTE-189 by <i>STK11</i> and <i>KEAP1</i> status

2020· article· en· W3083563724 on OpenAlexaff
Shirish M. Gadgeel, Delvys Rodríguez‐Abreu, Enriqueta Felip, Emilio Esteban, Giovanna Speranza, Martin Reck, Rina Hui, Michael Boyer, Edward B. Garon, Hidehito Horinouchi, Răzvan Cristescu, Deepti Aurora-Garg, Andrey Loboda, Jared Lunceford, Julie Kobie, Mark Ayers, Bilal Piperdi, M. Catherine Pietanza, Marina Chiara Garassino

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPembrolizumabPemetrexedSTK11MedicineInternal medicineOncologyGemcitabineChemotherapyCancerImmunotherapyKRAS

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Mutations in the tumor suppressor genes STK11 (also known as LKB1) and KEAP1 have been associated with poorer clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with NSCLC. In an exploratory analysis, we assessed the prevalence of STK11 and KEAP1 mutations and their association with efficacy in KEYNOTE-189 (NCT02578680). Methods: STK11 and KEAP1 status and tumor mutational burden (TMB) were assessed by whole-exome sequencing (WES) in pts who had available tumor and matched-normal tissue. PD-L1 was assessed by the PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx assay. The association of STK11 and KEAP1 status with efficacy and their correlation with TMB and PD-L1 expression distributions were evaluated descriptively. Results: WES data from both tumor and normal DNA were evaluable for 289 (47%) of 616 pts, of whom 54 (19%) had an STK11 mutation and 68 (24%) had a KEAP1 mutation; 29 (10%) had both STK11 and KEAP1 mutations. PD-L1 TPS tended to be lower in pts with vs without STK11 mutation (median [IQR] 0% [0-16] vs 15% [0-75]), whereas TMB score tended to be higher in pts with mutation (209 [132-265] vs 146 [89-264]). Similar patterns were seen for pts with vs without KEAP1 mutation (PD-L1 TPS: 1% [0-13] vs 20% [0-75]; TMB: 173 [124-267] vs 147 [89-263]). Although ORR of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was lower and PFS and OS shorter in pts with vs without STK11 and KEAP1 mutation, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was associated with numerically better outcomes than placebo plus chemotherapy regardless of mutation status (Table). 95% CIs were wide given the modest mutation frequency and the 2:1 randomization in favor of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy. Conclusions: Data from this exploratory analysis support use of pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum as standard first-line therapy for pts with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC regardless of STK11 or KEAP1 status. STK11KEAP1With MutationWithout MutationWith MutationWithout MutationPembro + ChemoPlacebo + ChemoPembro + ChemoPlacebo + ChemoPembro + ChemoPlacebo + ChemoPembro + ChemoPlacebo + Chemo(n = 36)(n = 18)(n = 168)(n = 67)(n = 45)(n = 23)(n = 159)(n = 62)ORR, % (95% CI)31 (16-48)17 (4-41)49 (41-57)16 (8-27)36 (22-51)17 (5-39)48 (40-56)16 (8-28)PFS, median, mo (95% CI)6 (4-9)5 (5-9)10 (8-14)5 (5-5)5 (4-11)5 (5-9)10 (8-14)5 (5-5)PFS, HR (95% CI)0.81 (0.44-1.47)0.38 (0.27-0.52)0.65 (0.38-1.12)0.38 (0.28-0.53)OS, median, mo (95% CI)17 (5-NR)8 (7-NR)23 (20-NR)12 (8-25)13 (7-NR)9 (7-NR)24 (20-NR)12 (8-NR)OS, HR (95% CI)0.75 (0.37-1.50)0.59 (0.41-0.85)0.81 (0.44-1.49)0.57 (0.39-0.84) Citation Format: Shirish M. Gadgeel, Delvys Rodriguez-Abreu, Enriqueta Felip, Emilio Esteban, Giovanna Speranza, Martin Reck, Rina Hui, Michael Boyer, Edward B. Garon, Hidehito Horinouchi, Razvan Cristescu, Deepti Aurora-Garg, Andrey Loboda, Jared Lunceford, Julie Kobie, Mark Ayers, Bilal Piperdi, M. Catherine Pietanza, Marina C. Garassino. Pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed and platinum vs placebo plus pemetrexed and platinum as first-line therapy for metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC: analysis of KEYNOTE-189 by STK11 and KEAP1 status [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 LB-397.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207