MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase II trial assessing niraparib with or without dostarlimab (anti-PD-1) in recurrent endometrial carcinoma.

2021· article· en· W3167584894 on OpenAlexaff
Ainhoa Madariaga, Swati Garg, Naïri Tchrakian, Neesha C. Dhani, Waldo Jiménez, Stephen Welch, Helen Mackay, Josée-Lyne Ethier, Lucy Gilbert, Angela Rodriguez, Lucy Chan, Valerie Bowering, Blaise Clarke, Tracy Stockley, Xuan Li, Lisa Wang, Smitha Udagani, Amit M. Oza, Stéphanie Lheureux

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreCancer Care OntarioMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoRoyal Victoria HospitalUniversity Health NetworkToronto General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersConquer Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePTENOlaparibClinical endpointOncologyInternal medicineEndometrial cancerBiomarkerCohortSerous fluidPhases of clinical researchCancerClinical trialGastroenterologyPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5574 Background: Treatment options in recurrent endometrial carcinoma (EC) are limited. Endometrioid EC shows alterations in PTEN, a possible biomarker of response to PARP inhibitors (PARPi). Similarly, homologous recombination deficiency (HRd), a biomarker of response to PARPi in ovarian cancer, is associated with serous EC harbouring TP53 mutations. Preclinical EC models have shown synergy between combining a PARPi and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). Methods: A pilot multi-centre, non-randomized, phase II trial enrolled patients (pts) with recurrent serous or endometrioid EC in two consecutive cohorts (NCT03016338). In the first cohort (C1) pts received niraparib 200 or 300 mg qd, based on baseline body weight and platelet count, in 4 week (w) cycles. In the second cohort (C2) niraparib was given with dostarlimab 500 mg q 3 w for 4 cycles, followed by 1000 mg q 6 w thereafter. There was no limit on prior lines of therapy. Prior ICI was not allowed in C2. Primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete, partial response or stable disease ≥16w). Secondary endpoints included toxicity assessment and ORR. CT scans were performed q 8 w. Potential biomarkers were assessed in archival tissue by IHC (PTEN, p53, MMR, PDL-1 [threshold 1%]) and a NGS panel (including TP53, PTEN, POLE and other HRd genes). Tumour mutational burden-high (TMBh) was defined as top 20% mutation load. Results: In C1, 25 pts were enrolled (23 evaluable for response). Median age was 69 years old, 64% had serous EC, 72% were platinum resistant (PlatR) and median prior therapies was 2 (range 1-4). Median number of cycles was 3. The CBR was 20% (95% CI: 9-39) and median clinical benefit (CB) duration was 5.3 (1.8-7.2) months. The ORR was 1/23 (4%; 0-20). Related grade (g) ≥3 AEs ≥10% were anemia (24%), fatigue (16%) and thrombocytopenia (16%). In C2, 22 pts were enrolled (all evaluable) and two continue on-treatment. Median age was 64 years old, 46% had serous EC, 68% were PlatR and median prior therapies was 2 (1-6). Three pts had MMR deficient (MMRd) tumors (14%) and one pt a POLE mutation (5%). Median number of cycles was 3. The CBR was 31.8% (16-53) and median CB duration was 6.8 months (3.7-9.5). The ORR was 3/22 (14%; 3-35), out of the three responders one had MMRd and one a POLE mutation. Related g≥3 AEs ≥10% were anemia (27%) and neutropenia (14%). No significant correlation was detected between CB and IHC markers (PTEN, p53, MMR, PDL-1), or NGS ( PTEN, TP53, HRd TMBh) in C1 and C2. Conclusions: Niraparib as single agent for treatment in a PlatR enriched recurrent EC population showed modest activity with clinical benefit rate at 16w of 20%. The combination of niraparib and dostarlimab showed a clinical benefit rate at 16w of 31.8% in a predominantly PlatR recurrent EC. PTEN loss by IHC or NGS, and alterations in HRd genes did not correlate with clinical benefit. Clinical trial information: NCT03016338.

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment→French-language works237,207→