MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Predictive value of germline <i>ATM</i> mutations in the CCTG PA.7 trial: Gemcitabine (GEM) and nab-paclitaxel (Nab-P) versus GEM, nab-P, durvalumab (D) and tremelimumab (T) as first-line therapy in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC).

2021· article· en· W3168598724 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. Renouf, Jonathan M. Loree, Jennifer J. Knox, Petr Kavan, Derek J. Jonker, Stephen Welch, Félix Couture, Frédéric Lemay, Mustapha Tehfé, Mohammed Harb, Nathalie Aucoin, Yoo‐Joung Ko, Patricia A. Tang, James T. Topham, Shidong Jia, Pan Du, David F. Schaeffer, Sharlene Gill, Dongsheng Tu, Christopher J. O’Callaghan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityGenome British ColumbiaSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeCancer Care OntarioCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecBC Cancer AgencyVancouver General HospitalUniversity of CalgaryPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHealth Sciences CentreUniversity Health NetworkOttawa HospitalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill UniversityMoncton Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGermlineGemcitabineClinical endpointOncologySurrogate endpointGastroenterologyUrologyRandomized controlled trialCancerGeneGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4135 Background: PA.7 evaluated whether combining PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibition with GEM and Nab-P increases efficacy. A previous analysis of the PA.7 data demonstrated high plasma based TMB (≥9 mut/Mb) was associated with improved OS in the Gem, Nab-P, D+T arm. DNA repair pathway aberrations beyond mismatch repair have been associated with potential immune sensitivity. We assessed the predictive value of germline ATM mutations in the PA.7 trial. Methods: This randomized phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02879318) assessed the efficacy and safety of GEM, Nab-P, D, and T (arm A) vs. GEM and Nab-P (arm B) in patients (pts) with mPDAC (n = 180). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Pre-treatment plasma was sequenced with the Predicine ATLAS next generation assay (600 gene, 2.4 Mb panel). 2-sided alpha set at 0.1. Results: 180 pts were randomized (119 to arm A and 61 to arm B) There was no significant difference in OS (9.8 months in arm A vs. 8.8 months in arm B, p-value 0.72) or PFS (5.5 months and 5.4 months respectively, HR 0.98, p-value 0.91). Plasma analysis was performed on 174/180 pts with available samples. 16/174 (9.2%) pts had germline ATM mutations, 12 in arm A and 4 in arm B. GEM, Nab-P, D+T was associated with improved OS in patients with ATM mutations (HR 0.10, 90% CI 0.03-0.37; median OS 13.9 months vs. 4.9 months) while no activity was seen in pts with ATM Wild Type (HR 0.99, 90% CI 0.73-1.33; median OS 9.79 months vs. 10.2 months); interaction p = 0.014. Germline ATM mutation status was independent of plasma TMB levels (Wilcoxon p = 0.76). Conclusions: Germline ATM mutation appeared predictive of benefit from the addition of dual immune checkpoint inhibitors (D and T) to Gem and Nab-P, with a significant interaction p-value. In addition to previous data from this trial regarding the predictive value of high plasma TMB (≥9 mut/Mb), this data further supports that there may be independent subgroups of PDAC, beyond MSI-H, that may benefit from immunotherapy, and trials evaluating immunotherapy in subgroups of PDAC with these profiles are warranted. Clinical trial information: NCT02879318.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→