MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

First-line pembrolizumab (pembro) monotherapy in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC): Updated follow-up for KEYNOTE-427 cohort A.

2020· article· en· W4248346590 on OpenAlexaff
David F. McDermott, Jae‐Lyun Lee, Georg A. Bjarnason, James Larkin, Rustem Gafanov, Mark D. Kochenderfer, Niels Viggo Jensen, Frede Donskov, Jahangeer Malik, Alexandr Poprach, Scott S. Tykodi, Teresa Alonso Gordoa, Daniel C. Cho, Poul Geertsen, Miguel Á. Climent Durán, Christopher Di Simone, Xiaoqi Du, Rodolfo F. Perini, Karla Rodriguez-Lopez, Michael B. Atkins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortPembrolizumabRenal cell carcinomaInternal medicineProportional hazards modelDiscontinuationUrologyClear cell renal cell carcinomaOncologySurgeryGastroenterologyCancerNuclear medicineImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5069 Background: KEYNOTE-427 (NCT02853344), an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, showed clinical activity of first-line pembro monotherapy in patients (pts) with ccRCC (cohort A). Previous studies in RCC and immune-oncology suggest depth of response may correlate with long-term benefit. Association between depth of response and OS, along with updated efficacy and safety for cohort A of KEYNOTE-427, are presented. Methods: Pts with histologically confirmed ccRCC, measurable disease (RECIST v1.1), and no prior systemic therapy received pembro 200 mg IV Q3W for 2 y or until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. End points: ORR (primary), DOR, and PFS (RECIST v1.1); OS, and safety. Association between depth of response (maximum reduction from baseline in the sum of target lesions) and OS was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards model with target lesion reduction group as time-varying covariate. Results: 110 pts enrolled; median time from enrollment to data cutoff was 23.1 (range, 16.7-27.5) mo. Overall, 38.2% of pts had favorable and 61.2% had intermediate/poor IMDC risk. ORR was 36.4% (95% CI, 27.4-46.1; 3 CRs, 37 PRs); median (range) DOR was not reached (2.3-23.5+ mo); 64.0% had a DOR ≥12 mo. Median PFS was 7.1 mo (95% CI, 5.6-11.0) and median OS was not reached; 18-mo PFS and OS rates were 26.6% and 80.0%, respectively. 69.1% had some reduction in target lesions. Pts with > 60% reduction in target lesions had a greater probability of survival than pts with a ≤60% reduction (Table). ORR observed in IMDC favorable and intermediate/poor risk was 31.0% and 39.7%, respectively; 18-mo OS rate was 95.2% for favorable and 70.5% for intermediate/poor IMDC risk. Treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 81.8% of pts, primarily fatigue (29.1%) and pruritus (28.2%). Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 29.1% of pts; 1 pt died of treatment-related pneumonitis. Conclusions: First-line pembro monotherapy was tolerable and showed promising antitumor activity in advanced ccRCC. In general, pts who had greater reductions in target lesions demonstrated a trend toward improved OS; pts with reduction of tumor burden ≥80% had comparable long term outcomes to those who achieved a RECIST 1.1 defined CR. Clinical trial information: NCT02853344 . [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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→