MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Post hoc analysis of the efficacy of pembrolizumab retreatment after progression of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) in KEYNOTE-045 and KEYNOTE-052.

2022· article· en· W4213280237 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Castellano, Arjun Vasant Balar, Peter H. O’Donnell, Petros Grivas, David J. Vaughn, Thomas Powles, Jacqueline Vuky, Jae‐Lyun Lee, Yves Fradet, Joaquim Bellmunt, Miguel Ángel Climent, Nicholas J. Vogelzang, Elizabeth R. Plimack, Howard Gurney, Noah M. Hahn, Cora N. Sternberg, Jin Xu, Kentaro Imai, Blanca Homet Moreno, Ronald de Wit

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabDiscontinuationOncologyInternal medicineClinical trialCancerImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

512 Background: Pembrolizumab (pembro) has shown efficacy in advanced/unresectable and metastatic UC (mUC). There is interest in determining whether pts should be treated subsequently with checkpoint inhibitors such as anti–PD-1 therapy if mUC responds then later progresses. Pembro retreatment after disease progression has shown efficacy in melanoma and NSCLC. This post hoc exploratory analysis investigated the efficacy of pembro retreatment for pts with advanced UC or mUC enrolled in KEYNOTE-045 and KEYNOTE-052 with a best overall response (BOR) of SD or better and whose disease progressed after discontinuation or completion of 2 y of therapy. Methods: The phase 3 KEYNOTE-045 trial (NCT02256436) was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of pembro vs chemotherapy (chemo) in pts with mUC that recurred/progressed on platinum containing chemo; ≤2 prior lines of systemic chemo for mUC were permitted. The phase 2 KEYNOTE-052 trial (NCT02335424) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line pembro in cisplatin-ineligible pts with advanced UC. In both studies, pembro was administered for up to 2 y; pts were eligible for retreatment if they stopped pembro after CR or had a BOR of CR, PR, or SD and completed 2 y of treatment. Pts must have investigator-confirmed radiographic PD after therapy cessation, have ECOG PS score 0-1, and not have received anticancer treatment after the last pembro dose. BOR to retreatment is reported. Results: At data cutoff for KEYNOTE-045 (Oct 1, 2020), 11 pts were retreated: 5 (45%) achieved objective response to retreatment (3 CR; 2 PR; Table) and 6 had SD, for a disease control rate (DCR; CR+PR+SD) of 100%. Median treatment-free interval was 7.7 mo (IQR, 3.6-16.5); median duration of retreatment was 11.4 mo (IQR, 7.6-12.0). Seven pts (64%) were alive at cutoff. At data cutoff for KEYNOTE-052 (Sep 26, 2020), 10 pts were retreated; 5 (50%) had objective response to retreatment (1 CR; 4 PR) and 4 had SD, for a DCR of 90%. Retreatment BOR was PD for 1 pt (10%). Median treatment-free interval was 13.0 mo (9.2-16.6); median duration of retreatment was 6.0 mo (IQR, 4.9-9.2). Four pts (40%) were alive at cutoff. Conclusions: Although the number of pts who received retreatment was small, objective responses were observed. The findings are generally consistent with observations from retreatment in other tumor types (e.g., melanoma). Clinical trial information: NCT02256436 and NCT02335424. [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 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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→