Avelumab in paediatric patients with refractory or relapsed solid tumours: dose-escalation results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We report dose-escalation results from an open-label, phase 1/2 trial evaluating avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours. METHODS: In phase 1, patients aged < 18 years with solid (including central nervous system [CNS]) tumours for which standard therapy did not exist or had failed were enrolled in sequential cohorts of 3-6 patients. Patients received avelumab 10 or 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: At data cut-off (27 July 2021), 21 patients aged 3-17 years had received avelumab 10 mg/kg (n = 6) or 20 mg/kg (n = 15). One patient had three events that were classified as a DLT (fatigue with hemiparesis and muscular weakness associated with pseudoprogression; 20 mg/kg cohort). Grade ≥ 3 AEs occurred in five (83%) and 11 (73%) patients in the 10 and 20 mg/kg cohorts, respectively, and were treatment-related in one patient (7%; grade 3 [DLT]) in the 20 mg/kg cohort. Avelumab exposure in paediatric patients receiving 20 mg/kg dosing, but not 10 mg/kg, was comparable or higher compared with approved adult dosing (10 mg/kg or 800 mg flat dose). No objective responses were observed. Four patients with CNS tumours (20 mg/kg cohort) achieved stable disease, which was ongoing in two patients with astrocytoma at cut-off (for 24.7 and 30.3 months). CONCLUSION: In paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours, avelumab monotherapy showed a safety profile consistent with previous adult studies, but clinical benefits were limited.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".