MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Favezelimab (anti–LAG-3) plus pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) after anti–PD-1 treatment: An open-label phase 1/2 study.

2022· article· en· W4281670144 on OpenAlexaff
John M. Timmerman, David Lavie, Nathalie A. Johnson, Abraham Avigdor, Peter Borchmann, Charalambos Andreadis, Ali Bazargan, Gareth P. Gregory, Colm Keane, Inna Tzoran, Vladan Vučinić, Pier Luigi Zinzani, Hong Zhang, Pallavi Pillai, Patricia Marinello, Alex F. Herrera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabRefractory (planetary science)Internal medicineCohortOncologyClinical endpointNeutropeniaGastroenterologyCancerClinical trialToxicityImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7545 Background: PD-1 inhibitors are a standard of care for R/R cHL but optimal therapy after anti–PD-1 therapy failure is yet to be defined. LAG-3/PD-1 coblockade has demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models. This multicohort phase 1/2 study (NCT03598608) evaluated the safety and efficacy of favezelimab (MK-4280), a humanized IgG4 LAG-3 inhibitor, plus the PD-1 inhibitor pembrolizumab (pembro) in pts with R/R hematologic malignancies. Cohort 2 focused on pts with R/R cHL refractory to anti–PD-1 therapy. Methods: This study included a safety lead-in phase (part 1) to determine recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) followed by a dose-expansion phase (part 2). Eligible pts in cohort 2 had R/R cHL, relapsed after or were ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), and progressed after ≥2 doses of anti–PD-1 therapy (within 12 weeks of last dose). In part 1, pts from all cohorts received pembro IV 200 mg Q3W and favezelimab IV 200 mg or 800 mg Q3W. Dose-finding based on occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) was determined using an mTPI design. In part 2, pts received pembro + favezelimab at the established RP2D for up to 35 cycles. Primary end point was safety. Secondary end point was ORR. DOR, PFS, and OS were exploratory. Results: Only 1 DLT (autoimmune hepatitis [grade 4]) was observed among the first 6 pts from all cohorts in part 1 at the favezelimab 200 mg dose; thus, the dose was escalated to 800 mg. No DLTs were observed in 15 additional pts at the 800 mg dose. Favezelimab RP2D was defined as 800 mg Q3W + pembro 200 mg Q3W. In cohort 2, 33 pts were enrolled; median age was 37 yrs, 64% had ECOG PS 0, and 94% had ≥4 prior lines of therapy. After a median follow-up of 16.5 mo, ORR for pts receiving favezelimab 800 mg (n = 29) was 31% (95% CI, 15-51; CR, 2 [7%]; PR, 7 [24%]); 66% of responders had an anti–PD-1–based regimen as most recent line of therapy at study entry. 23 of 29 pts (79%) had reduction from baseline in target lesions. Median DOR for pts who received favezelimab 800 mg was not reached (NR; 95% CI, 0+ to 14+ mo). For all pts in cohort 2, median PFS was 9 mo (95% CI, 5-15); 12-mo PFS rate was 39%. Median OS was 26 mo (95% CI, 26-NR); 12-mo OS rate was 91%. At database cutoff (Nov 1, 2021), 20 pts discontinued treatment (7 AEs, 11 PD/clinical progression, 2, withdrawal/physician decision). TRAEs occurred in 28 pts (85%); most common ( > 10%) were hypothyroidism (18%), nausea and fatigue (15% each), and arthralgia and diarrhea (12% each); grade 3 or 4 TRAEs occurred in 6 pts (18%); 18% discontinued treatment due to TRAEs. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Conclusions: Favezelimab 800 mg + pembro 200 mg Q3W showed a tolerable safety profile and effective antitumor activity in heavily pretreated pts with R/R cHL whose disease had progressed after anti–PD-1 therapy, suggesting that the combination may reinduce a response in these pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03598608.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207