OX40 Agonist BMS-986178 Alone or in Combination With Nivolumab and/or Ipilimumab in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This phase I/IIa study (NCT02737475) evaluated the safety and activity of BMS-986178, a fully human OX40 agonist IgG1 mAb, ± nivolumab and/or ipilimumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (with non-small cell lung, renal cell, bladder, other advanced cancers) received BMS-986178 (20-320 mg) ± nivolumab (240-480 mg) and/or ipilimumab (1-3 mg/kg). The primary endpoint was safety. Additional endpoints included immunogenicity, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity per RECIST version 1.1. RESULTS: Twenty patients received BMS-986178 monotherapy, and 145 received combination therapy in various regimens (including two patients receiving nivolumab monotherapy). With a follow-up of 1.1 to 103.6 weeks, the most common (≥5%) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) included fatigue, pruritus, rash, pyrexia, diarrhea, and infusion-related reactions. Overall, grade 3-4 TRAEs occurred in one of 20 patients (5%) receiving BMS-986178 monotherapy, six of 79 (8%) receiving BMS-986178 plus nivolumab, zero of two receiving nivolumab monotherapy, six of 41 (15%) receiving BMS-986178 plus ipilimumab, and three of 23 (13%) receiving BMS-986178 plus nivolumab plus ipilimumab. No deaths occurred. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed with monotherapy, and the MTD was not reached in either the monotherapy or the combination escalation cohorts. No objective responses were seen with BMS-986178 alone; objective response rates ranged from 0% to 13% across combination therapy cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, BMS-986178 ± nivolumab and/or ipilimumab appeared to have a manageable safety profile, but no clear efficacy signal was observed above that expected for nivolumab and/or ipilimumab.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".