MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249692483 · doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2020.06.002

Safety and Efficacy of Nivolumab in Patients With Advanced Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: Results From the Phase IIIb/IV CheckMate 374 Study

2020· article· en· W4249692483 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Joshua J. McFarlane, Mark D. Kochenderfer, Mark R. Olsen, Todd M. Bauer, Ana M. Molina, Ralph J. Hauke, James A. Reeves, Sunil Babu, Peter J. Van Veldhuizen, Bradley G. Somer, Vijay Gunuganti, Ian D. Schnadig, Saby George, Ray D. Page, Edward Arrowsmith, Rohit Jain, Joshua Zhang, M. Brent McHenry, Jennifer L. Johansen, Nicholas J. Vogelzang

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genitourinary Cancer · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGuardant HealthJanssen PharmaceuticalsJanssen BiotechBristol-Myers Squibb CanadaEMD SeronoGenentechAstellas PharmaEisaiDaiichi-SankyoAileron TherapeuticsCTI BiopharmaImmunoGenMirati TherapeuticsBayer FundFive Prime TherapeuticsAcceleronClovis OncologyTG TherapeuticsAstraZenecaNovocureSanofi GenzymeTakeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.ImmunocoreAbbVieKaryopharm TherapeuticsExelixisMedImmuneSanofiCelgeneNovartisMerckGlaxoSmithKlineRocheFoundation MedicineAstellas Pharma USAmerican Society of Clinical OncologyOno PharmaceuticalEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbBoston BiomedicalPfizerAmgenBoehringer IngelheimCalithera BiosciencesBayerSarah Cannon Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineNivolumabRenal cell carcinomaRashClinical endpointRegimenClear cell renal cell carcinomaProgression-free survivalGastroenterologyPhases of clinical researchOncologySurgeryCancerToxicityChemotherapyClinical trialImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The open-label, phase IIIb/IV CheckMate 374 study (NCT02596035) was conducted to validate the safety and efficacy of flat-dose nivolumab monotherapy 240 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W) in previously treated advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Three cohorts included patients with predominantly clear cell histology, non-clear cell histologies, or brain metastases. We report safety and efficacy from the CheckMate 374 advanced clear cell RCC (ccRCC) cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients received prior treatment regimens (1-2 antiangiogenic; 0-3 systemic) with progression on/after last treatment and ≤ 6 months of enrollment. Patients received nivolumab 240 mg Q2W for ≤ 24 months or until confirmed progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was incidence of high-grade (grade 3-5) immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs). Exploratory endpoints included objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients had advanced predominantly ccRCC; 75.3% received only 1 prior systemic regimen in the advanced/metastatic setting. After a median follow-up of 17 months (range, 0.4-26.9 months), no grade 5 IMAEs occurred, and 9.3% of patients reported grade 3/4 IMAEs (hepatitis, 4.1%; diabetes mellitus, 2.1%; nephritis and renal dysfunction, 1.0%; rash, 1.0%; adrenal insufficiency, 1.0%). The objective response rate was 22.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.8%-32.3%). Three patients had a complete response; 19 had partial responses. The median progression-free survival was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0-5.5 months). The median overall survival was 21.8 months (95% CI, 17.4 months to not estimable). CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the safety and efficacy of nivolumab 240 mg Q2W flat-dose monotherapy for previously treated advanced ccRCC and adds to previous safety and efficacy data using the 3 mg/kg Q2W dose.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Genitourinary CancerSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207