Abstract CT002: Phase 3 randomized trial comparing tebentafusp with investigator's choice in first line metastatic uveal melanoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) has a poor prognosis with a 1-yr OS rate of 52%. No systemic treatment has proven an OS benefit in randomized trials. Tebentafusp (tebe), a bispecific consisting of an affinity-enhanced T cell receptor (TCR) fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target gp100+ cells, has shown promising activity in previously treated mUM pts. Here, we report the primary analysis of overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population (ITT) of a Ph3 trial of tebe vs. investigator's choice (IC) as first line (1L) therapy in pts with mUM [NCT03070392]. Materials and Methods: In this randomized, open-label, Ph3 trial, 1L HLA-A*02:01+ pts with mUM were randomized 2:1 to receive tebe or IC of pembrolizumab, ipilimumab or dacarbazine, stratified by LDH. The primary endpoint was OS, defined as the time from randomization to death from any cause. Dual primary objectives were to evaluate 1) OS in the ITT population by comparing all tebe-randomized pts to all IC-randomized pts; and 2) OS in tebentafusp-treated patients with rash during week 1 versus all IC-treated patients. Secondary endpoints included safety and RECIST-defined overall response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) and disease control rate (DCR). Here we present the OS in the ITT population. The study was unblinded by an independent data monitoring committee at the first pre-specified interim analysis. Investigator-reported radiographic-based endpoints were not mature at the first interim analysis. This analysis was conducted on the first interim analysis (data extracted Nov 2020). Results: 378 pts were randomized to tebe (252) or IC, including pembrolizumab (103), ipilimumab (15) or dacarbazine (7). Tebe significantly prolonged OS compared to IC (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.36-0.71; P<0.0001) in the ITT population, with estimated 1-yr OS rate of 73.2% (95% CI 66.3-78.9) vs 57.5% (95% CI 47.0-66.6), respectively. The OS benefit of tebe was observed in pre-specified subgroups, including by stratification variable of LDH>ULN and versus pembrolizumab IC. Most common TRAEs were skin-related (gp100+ melanocytes) or cytokine-mediated (T cell activation) and included pyrexia, pruritus, and rash. These AEs decreased in frequency and severity after the first 3-4 doses and were generally manageable with standard interventions. In the tebe arm, the rate of treatment discontinuation due to TRAEs was low (<4%), and there were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: In 1L treatment of mUM pts, tebe monotherapy significantly improved OS compared to IC; the first investigational therapy to improve OS in pts with mUM. Tebe had a predictable and manageable AE profile with a low rate of related discontinuation. Tebe is the first TCR therapeutic to demonstrate an OS benefit. Citation Format: Sophie Piperno-Neumann, Jessica C. Hassel, Piotr Rutkowski, Jean-Francois Baurain, Marcus O. Butler, Max Schlaak, Ryan J. Sullivan, Sebastian Ochsenreither, Reinhard Dummer, John M. Kirkwood, Anthony M. Joshua, Joseph J. Sacco, Alexander N. Shoushtari, Marlana Orloff, Richard D. Carvajal, Omid Hamid, Shaad E. Abdullah, Chris Holland, Howard Goodall, Paul Nathan. Phase 3 randomized trial comparing tebentafusp with investigator's choice in first line metastatic uveal melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT002.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".