MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Real-world treatment patterns and overall survival in previously treated advanced renal cell carcinoma patients receiving nivolumab in the UK.

2021· article· en· W3166268850 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tom Waddell, Kate Fife, Richard W. Griffiths, Anand Sharma, Poonam Dhokia, Jason Gordon, Lara Groves, Michael Hurst, Daniel Sugrue, Carmen Tsang, Stephen P. McKenna, John Houghton, Robert Carroll

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBristol-Myers Squibb Canada
KeywordsNivolumabMedicinePazopanibAxitinibSunitinibRenal cell carcinomaCabozantinibInternal medicineOncologyTyrosine-kinase inhibitorSurgeryCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e16561 Background: CheckMate 025 demonstrated favorable efficacy and safety results for nivolumab monotherapy in previously treated advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). However, real-world evidence on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes is limited. Methods: This multi-centre, retrospective cohort study examined treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) in aRCC patients treated with nivolumab monotherapy. Eligible patients who initiated nivolumab at second-line (2L) or beyond (index) between 01 March 2016 and 30 June 2018 were sampled from four UK centers. Data were extracted using an electronic case report form from index to earliest of: most recent visit; death; end of follow up (31 May 2019). Results: Overall , 151 patients were included in analyses (mean age at index 66.9 years, 72.2% male, median follow-up from index 15.2 months), with 109 (72.2%) and 42 (27.8%) receiving nivolumab at 2L and ≥ third-line (3L+), respectively. Key clinical characteristics are outlined in Table 1. All 2L nivolumab patients had received first-line (1L) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), pazopanib (57.8%), sunitinib (30.3%), or both in sequence (10.1%). After 2L nivolumab, 3L cabozantinib (36/52, 69.2%) was most common. Most 3L nivolumab patients received 2L TKI (31/36, 86.1%) - commonly axitinib (70.9%). After 3L nivolumab, most patients received fourth-line cabozantinib (8/12, 66.7%). Median time on line of therapy (LOT) decreased with LOT progression: from 7.8 months at 1L to 4.6 months at fifth-line (5L). The proportion of patients who discontinued treatment due to adverse events decreased by LOT, (28.6%, 22.7%, 16.0% and 0%, and 34.7%, 28.1%, 0% and 0% from 2L to 5L, overall and for nivolumab treatment, respectively). Overall, median OS from nivolumab initiation was 19.2 months [95% CI, 16.9-27.0]. Patients who received 2L nivolumab had longest median OS (23.0 months [95% CI, 17.2, not reached]), comparable to CheckMate 025 (25.8 months [95% CI, 22.2-29.8]). Median OS for 3L+ nivolumab patients was 12.4 months [95% CI, 8.8, 23.2]. Among 2L nivolumab patients, 73.9%, 46.2%, and 33.6% survived 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. For the same respective timeframes, 52.4%, 24.7%, and 18.6% of 3L+ nivolumab patients survived. Conclusions: This study provides real-world evidence on the characteristics, treatment patterns and effectiveness of 2L or ≥ 3L nivolumab monotherapy in previously treated aRCC patients. OS results from UK routine clinical care were comparable to those found in CheckMate 025.[Table: see text]

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→