MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract CT006: Phase 2 study of pembrolizumab (pembro) for locally advanced (LA) or recurrent/metastatic (R/M) cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC): KEYNOTE-629

2021· article· en· W3182666754 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Hughes, Eva Muñoz‐Couselo, Laurent Mortier, Åse Bratland, Ralf Gutzmer, Osama Roshdy, René González Mendoza, Jacob Schachter, Ana Arance, Florent Grange, Nicolás Meyer, Abhishek Joshi, Salem Billan, Pingye Zhang, Burak Gümüşçü, Ramona F. Swaby, Jean‐Jacques Grob

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortTolerabilityDiscontinuationPembrolizumabInternal medicineClinical endpointOncologyClinical trialAdverse effectSurgeryCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In the multicenter, open-label, nonrandomized, phase 2 KEYNOTE-629 trial, pembro has demonstrated clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile for R/M cSCC based on the first interim analysis (IA). Here, we present the second IA of KEYNOTE-629, which reports the initial efficacy and safety data for the LA cohort and updated data for the R/M cohort in cSCC.Methods: Eligible patients (pts) were ≥18 years old, had histologically confirmed cSCC (LA or R/M) with measurable disease per RECIST 1.1 by blinded independent central review (BICR), an ECOG PS score of 0 or 1, and adequate organ function. Pts received intravenous pembro 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 infusions (~ 2 years) or until protocol-specified treatment discontinuation criteria were met. The primary endpoint was ORR per RECIST 1.1 by BICR. Secondary endpoints were DOR, DCR, and PFS, all per RECIST 1.1 by BICR; OS; and safety and tolerability. Results: A total of 159 pts were enrolled and treated with pembro (LA, n=54; R/M, n=105). The median time from the first dose to data cutoff (July 29, 2020) was 14.9 (range, 10.1-19.4) mo for the LA cohort and 27.2 (range, 24.6-32.0) mo for the R/M cohort. In the LA cohort, 22.2% of pts were treated with prior systemic therapy with curative intent. In the R/M cohort, 86.7% of pts received ≥1 prior systemic therapy. Updated efficacy outcomes are summarized in the table. Across cohorts, grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 11.9% of pts. Grade 3-5 immune-related AEs occurred in 8.2% of pts. Conclusions: Pembro confirmed robust and durable antitumor activity, with promising survival in LA and R/M cSCC. AEs with pembro in this study were generally consistent with its established safety profile. These data support the use of pembro for cSCC. LA cSCC(N=54)R/M cSCC(N=105)Total(N=159)ORR, % (95% CI)50.0 (36.1-63.9)35.2 (26.2-45.2)40.3 (32.6-48.3)DCR (SD ≥12 wks + ORR), % (95% CI)64.8 (50.6-77.3)52.4 (42.4-62.2)56.6 (48.5-64.4)Best overall response, n (%)CR9 (16.7)11 (10.5)20 (12.6)PR18 (33.3)26 (24.8)44 (27.7)SD13 (24.1)30 (28.6)43 (27.0)SD≥12 wks8 (14.8)18 (17.1)26 (16.4)PD9 (16.7)28 (26.7)37 (23.3)NE1 (1.9)2 (1.9)3 (1.9)No assessment4 (7.4)8 (7.6)12 (7.5)DOR, median (range), moNR (1.0+-17.2+)NR (2.7-30.4+)NR (1.0+-30.4+)Patients with extended responses≥12 months, n (%)10 (84.1)25 (77.8)35 (80.3)PFS, median (95% CI), moNR (5.5-NR)5.7 (3.1-8.5)7.8 (5.3-12.3)12-mo PFS rate, % (95% CI)54.4 (39.6-67.0)36.4 (27.0- 45.9)42.4 (34.3-50.2)OS, median (95% CI), moNR (NR-NR)23.8 (13.4-29.8)26.4 (19.5-NR)12-mo OS rate, % (95% CI)73.6 (59.5-83.4)61.0 (50.9-69.5)65.1 (57.1-72.0) Citation Format: Brett G.M. Hughes, Eva Munoz-Couselo, Laurent Mortier, Åse Bratland, Ralf Gutzmer, Osama Roshdy, Rene González Mendoza, Jacob Schachter, Ana Arance, Florent Grange, Nicolas Meyer, Abhishek Joshi, Salem Billan, Pingye Zhang, Burak Gumuscu, Ramona F. Swaby, Jean-Jacques Grob. Phase 2 study of pembrolizumab (pembro) for locally advanced (LA) or recurrent/metastatic (R/M) cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC): KEYNOTE-629 [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 CT006.

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)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→