Phase I/Ib Clinical Trial of Sabatolimab, an Anti–TIM-3 Antibody, Alone and in Combination with Spartalizumab, an Anti–PD-1 Antibody, in Advanced Solid Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose: Sabatolimab (MBG453) and spartalizumab are mAbs that bind T-cell immunoglobulin domain and mucin domain-3 (TIM-3) and programmed death-1 (PD-1), respectively. This phase I/II study evaluated the safety and efficacy of sabatolimab, with or without spartalizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods: Primary objectives of the phase I/Ib part were to characterize the safety and estimate recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for future studies. Dose escalation was guided by a Bayesian (hierarchical) logistic regression model. Sabatolimab was administered intravenously, 20 to 1,200 mg, every 2 or 4 weeks (Q2W or Q4W). Spartalizumab was administered intravenously, 80 to 400 mg, Q2W or Q4W. Results: Enrolled patients (n = 219) had a range of cancers, most commonly ovarian (17%) and colorectal cancer (7%); patients received sabatolimab (n = 133) or sabatolimab plus spartalizumab (n = 86). The MTD was not reached. The most common adverse event suspected to be treatment-related was fatigue (9%, sabatolimab; 15%, combination). No responses were seen with sabatolimab. Five patients receiving combination treatment had partial responses (6%; lasting 12–27 months) in colorectal cancer (n = 2), non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), malignant perianal melanoma, and SCLC. Of the five, two patients had elevated expression of immune markers in baseline biopsies; another three had >10% TIM-3–positive staining, including one patient with NSCLC who received prior PD-1 therapy. Conclusions: Sabatolimab plus spartalizumab was well tolerated and showed preliminary signs of antitumor activity. The RP2D for sabatolimab was selected as 800 mg Q4W (alternatively Q3W or Q2W schedules, based on modeling), with or without 400 mg spartalizumab Q4W.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".