Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Response With Checkpoint Inhibitors in Malignant Melanoma of the Vulva and Vagina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to assess the clinical and histopathological characteristics of a comprehensive cohort of women with vulvovaginal melanoma (VVM) treated at our institution and to study the treatment response of checkpoint inhibitors in this patient cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of women with invasive VVM treated at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, over a period of 15 years. Clinical and histopathological characteristics, treatment, as well as treatment-related outcome were analyzed in 32 women. Treatment response was evaluated retrospectively using the "response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics" (iRECIST). The objective response rate was defined as the proportion of patients with complete or partial response based on the best overall response. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 37.8 months (5.8-110.4), 26 women (81.3%) had disease progression and 16 (50%) died. Thirteen patients with locally unresectable or metastatic melanoma were treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Ten additional cases were identified from previously published reports. The best objective response rate for immune checkpoint inhibitors was 30.4% (95% CI = 11.6%-49.2%) and the clinical benefit rate was 52.2% (95% CI = 31.8%-72.6%). The clinical benefit rate was significantly better for programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitors (or a combination) compared with ipilimumab alone (Fisher exact, p = .023). Grade 3/4 adverse events were observed in 3 (13.0%) of the 23 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Women with VVM constitute a high-risk group with poor overall prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are effective in the treatment of metastatic melanoma in this patient cohort.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".