MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Final analysis of a phase 1b, randomized, multicenter study of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) plus pembrolizumab (pembro) combination for the treatment (Tx) of recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M HNSCC): MASTERKEY-232.

2021· article· en· W3169399702 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin J. Harrington, Anthony Kong, Nicolas Mach, Jason Chesney, Beatriz Castelo, Danny Rischin, Ezra E.W. Cohen, Hoi-Shen Radcliffe, Burak Gümüşçü, Wendy Snyder, Lillian L. Siu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersAmgen
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabInternal medicineOncolytic virusOncologyRefractory (planetary science)CancerSurgeryImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6036 Background: T-VEC, a genetically modified herpes simplex virus-1, is the first FDA- and EMA-approved oncolytic viral immunotherapy designed to enhance systemic antitumor immune responses. R/M HNSCC is a disease with considerable clinical complexity and poor prognosis. Pembro is a PD-1-specific humanized monoclonal antibody currently approved as first-line Tx for this disease, but there is an unmet need among many patients (pts). To meet this gap, the safety and preliminary efficacy of T-VEC plus pembro in pts with R/M HNSCC was evaluated in a phase 1b study (Harrington et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2020). Here, we present results of the final analysis of this study (NCT02626000). Methods: Eligible pts (≥18 yrs) had ECOG-PS of 0 or 1; histologically confirmed R/M HNSCC of the oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, or larynx unsuitable for curative surgical resection or radiotherapy; platinum-refractory and with injectable tumors. Pts with known active CNS metastases and any systemic or local therapy 28 days before enrollment were excluded. T-VEC was injected intralesionally up to 8.0 mL of 10 6 PFU/mL according to lesion sizes on day 1; after 3 weeks, subsequent doses of ≤8.0 mL of 10 8 PFU/mL were given Q3W. Pembro was given intravenously at 200 mg Q3W. Pts were followed-up for 36 mos after the last patient was enrolled in the study. Key endpoints (irRECIST per investigator assessment) were objective response rate (ORR), best overall response (BOR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: A total of 36 pts (80.6% male) were enrolled and treated: 28 (77.8%) had confirmed PD-L1-positive tumor (CPS ≥1), 5 (13.9%) were HPV-positive, 13 (36.1%) had metastatic disease, and 19 (52.8%) had prior lines of therapy in the R/M setting. At the final analysis, 7 pts (19.4%) completed the study, and 29 (80.6%) discontinued the study due to death. Safety profile was consistent with that at 1-yr analysis (Harrington et al. Clin Cancer Res. 2020). Confirmed ORR was seen in 16.7% (95% CI, 6.4–32.8). No patient had a complete response as their BOR, 6 (16.7%) had a partial response, 8 (22.2%) had stable disease, 6 (16.7%) had progressive disease, 6 (16.7%) were unevaluable, and 10 (27.8%) died before the first response assessment. The DCR was 38.9% (95% CI, 23.1–56.5). The median DOR was 45.9 mos (95% CI, 8.5–NE). The median PFS was 3.0 mos (95% CI, 2.0–5.8), and the median OS was 5.8 mos (95% CI, 2.9–11.4). Conclusions: The safety results at 3 yrs for T-VEC plus pembro in pts with R/M HNSCC were consistent with those of the 1-yr analysis. Although the response rate was consistent with that observed with pembro alone in historical HNSCC studies, the extended DOR in responding patients warrants further investigation. Clinical trial information: NCT02626000.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicVirus-based gene therapy research→French-language works237,207→