MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Naxitamab (NAX) treatment for refractory/relapsed (R/R) high-risk neuroblastoma (HR-NB): Response data and efficacy in patient (pt) subgroups.

2022· article· en· W4281653153 on OpenAlexaff
Jaume Mora, Gcf Chan, Daniel A. Morgenstern, Karsten Nysom, Melissa Bear, Karen Tornøe, Per Settergren Sørensen, Brian H. Kushner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)PopulationPhases of clinical researchProgressive diseaseGastroenterologyClinical trialSurgeryOncologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e22019 Background: Almost half of pts with NB present with high-risk disease, most of whom experience persistence of disease or disease progression. Further, residual disease in the bone/bone marrow (BM) can drive relapse. NAX is a humanized GD2-binding monoclonal antibody indicated under accelerated approval in the US with GM-CSF for the treatment of R/R HR-NB in the bone/BM in pts ≥1 year of age with a partial response (PR), minor response (MR), or stable disease (SD) to prior therapy. Here we characterize the response data of NAX overall and efficacy in pt subgroups. Methods: Trial 201 is an ongoing registrational phase II trial evaluating NAX in pts with R/R HR-NB. Pts with progressive or residual soft tissue disease were excluded. NAX was administered over 30-60 min in the outpatient setting on Days 1/3/5 at 3 mg/kg/day with GM-CSF at 250 µg/m2/day on Days –4 to 0 and 500 µg/m2/day on Days 1 to 5; cycles were every 4 wks. Efficacy was evaluated by independent pathology and radiology review per revised International Neuroblastoma Response Criteria. Results: Results presented here are from an ad hoc interim analysis (Aug 5, 2020) of 48 pts (safety population) and 36 (efficacy population). Pts in the efficacy population received a median of 7 cycles (range 1–11). Overall response rate (ORR; complete response [CR] + PR) was 58% (44% CR; Table). Of the 9 responders who had PR initially, 4 improved to CR. Median number of cycles before onset of response (CR or PR) was 2 (range 2–8) and median time to onset of response (CR or PR) was 7.3 wks (95% CI 6–17). Median duration of response was 24.9 wks (95% CI 25–not estimable). The most common adverse events (CTCAE graded) were infusion-related reactions including hypotension and pain, which occurred in 98% and 96% of pts, respectively. Adverse events were managed with established guidelines. Conclusions: NAX provided a clinically meaningful response in pts with R/R HR-NB limited to bone/BM – frequent sites of residual disease. Response rates were generally consistent across subgroups. These efficacy results combined with a manageable safety profile and use in the outpatient setting demonstrate that NAX addresses a significant unmet medical need. Clinical trial information: NCT03363373. [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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207