MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract GS1-02: Final results of KEYNOTE-355: Randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs placebo + chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

2022· article· en· W4220799525 on OpenAlexaff
Javier Cortés, David W. Cescon, Hope S. Rugo, Zbigniew Nowecki, Seock‐Ah Im, Mastura Md Yusof, Carlos Gallardo, Oleg Lipatov, Carlos H. Barrios, José Manuel Pérez-García, Hiroji Iwata, Norikazu Masuda, Marco Torregroza Otero, Erhan Gökmen, Sherene Loi, Zifang Guo, Xuan Zhou, Vassiliki Karantza, Wilbur Pan, Peter Schmid

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGemcitabineCarboplatinPembrolizumabInternal medicineTaxaneHazard ratioPopulationOncologyPlaceboChemotherapyBreast cancerClinical endpointCancerConfidence intervalClinical trialCisplatinPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 trial (NCT02819518), pembrolizumab (pembro) combined with chemotherapy (chemo) showed statistically significant improvements in OS and PFS compared to placebo + chemo in patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic TNBC whose tumors expressed PD-L1 with a combined positive score (CPS) ≥10. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in the CPS ≥1 population, and statistical significance was not tested in the ITT population due to the prespecified testing strategy. Here, we compare outcomes in subgroups of patients by additional CPS cut-offs to the primary results of KEYNOTE-355. Methods: 847 patients with measurable disease per RECIST v1.1, ECOG PS 0-1, and ≥6 month disease-free interval were randomized 2:1 to pembro + chemo (nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days; paclitaxel 90 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days; or gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 + carboplatin AUC 2 days 1 and 8 every 21 days) or placebo + chemo for up to 35 administrations of pembro/placebo or until progression/intolerable toxicity. Patients were stratified by chemo type (taxane or gemcitabine-carboplatin), PD-L1 status (CPS ≥1 or <1), and prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment with same-class chemo (yes or no). Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS (RECIST v1.1, blinded independent central review) in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (CPS ≥10 and ≥1) and in the ITT population. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs in the additional CPS subgroups were based on an unstratified Cox model. Results: At the time of the final analysis (data cutoff, June 15, 2021), the median time from randomization to data cutoff was 44 months. Baseline characteristics of the CPS 1-9, 10-19, and ≥20 subgroups were generally similar to those of the ITT population. In the primary analyses, the HRs (95% CI) for OS were 0.73 (0.55-0.95) in the CPS ≥10 subgroup, 0.86 (0.72-1.04) in the CPS ≥1 subgroup, and 0.89 (0.76-1.05) in the ITT population; HRs (95% CI) for PFS were 0.66 (0.50-0.88), 0.75 (0.62-0.91), and 0.82 (0.70-0.98), respectively. Efficacy data are presented for the additional CPS subgroups in the Table. For OS, results in the CPS 1-9 subgroup showed comparable efficacy for pembro + chemo and placebo + chemo; however, results in the CPS 10-19 and CPS ≥20 subgroups showed a similar treatment benefit with the addition of pembro. Results for PFS were generally consistent with those observed for OS. Conclusions: These results provide support that CPS ≥10 is a reasonable cut-off to define the population of patients with metastatic TNBC expected to derive treatment benefit from pembro + chemo. Table. Efficacy in additional subgroups of patients by PD-L1 CPSCPS subgroupTreatmentMedian OS, mo (95% CI)OS HR (95% CI)*Median PFS, mo (95% CI)PFS HR (95% CI)*1-9†Pembro + Chemo. n = 20513.9. (12.2-16.6)1.09 (0.85-1.40)5.7. (5.4-7.4)0.85 (0.65-1.11)Placebo + Chemo n = 10815.5. (12.4-17.6)5.6. (5.3-7.6)10-19†Pembro + Chemo. n = 8020.3. (15.2-29.0)0.71 (0.46-1.09)9.9. (7.4-11.8)0.70 (0.44-1.09)Placebo + Chemo n = 3917.6. (10.3-25.8)7.6. (5.3-9.7)≥20‡Pembro + Chemo. n = 14024.0 (19.0-28.3)0.72 (0.51-1.01)9.2 (7.6-11.8)0.62 (0.44-0.88)Placebo + Chemo n = 6415.6. (12.3-20.8)5.4 (3.9-7.2)*Analyses based on an unstratified Cox model. †Post-hoc analyses. ‡Prespecified exploratory analyses. Citation Format: Javier Cortes, David W. Cescon, Hope S. Rugo, Zbigniew Nowecki, Seock-Ah Im, Mastura Md Yusof, Carlos Gallardo, Oleg Lipatov, Carlos Henrique Barrios, Jose Perez-Garcia, Hiroji Iwata, Norikazu Masuda, Marco Torregroza Otero, Erhan Gokmen, Sherene Loi, Zifang Guo, Xuan Zhou, Vassiliki Karantza, Wilbur Pan, Peter Schmid. Final results of KEYNOTE-355: Randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study of pembrolizumab + chemotherapy vs placebo + chemotherapy for previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-02.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207