Outcomes of patients who progressed while receiving avelumab + axitinib (A + Ax) and received subsequent treatment (Tx) in JAVELIN Renal 101.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4514 Background: There are limited data on the outcomes of patients receiving second-line (2L) therapy following immunotherapies plus tyrosine-kinase inhibitors in the first-line (1L). We describe the outcomes of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) who had received 1L A + Ax in the phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial and went on to receive subsequent Tx. Methods: At the cutoff date for the third interim analysis (April 28, 2020), patients who received 1L A + Ax (n = 442) and received any subsequent lines of Tx were assessed. We report the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival on next-line systemic therapy (PFS2) per type of Tx, and duration of 2L Tx. Results: Anticancer drug therapies were received by 204/442 patients following A + Ax Tx. Of patients who received a follow-up anticancer drug Tx, 163/204 received a single agent (SA), and 41/204 received a combination Tx (CT) regimen. The most common 2L SA was cabozantinib (60/163), and the most frequent 2L CT was everolimus + lenvatinib (12/41). OS, PFS2, and duration of treatment (DOT) for the various subgroups are summarized in the table below. Analyses on additional subgroups will also be presented. Conclusions: In patients with aRCC who received 2L CT following 1L treatment with A + Ax, long-term OS and PFS2 were observed. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006. [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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".