MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

SALVO: Single-arm trial of ipilimumab and nivolumab as adjuvant therapy for resected mucosal melanoma.

2022· article· en· W4281787542 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa A. Kottschade, Gregory R. Pond, Anthony J. Olszanski, Yousef Zakharia, Evidio Domingo‐Musibay, Ralph J. Hauke, Brendan D. Curti, Sarah Schober, Mohammed Milhem, Matthew S. Block, Robert R. McWilliams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityOntario Clinical Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIpilimumabNivolumabAdjuvantMelanomaInternal medicineClinical endpointAdjuvant therapyConcomitantOncologyRadiation therapyClinical trialSurgeryCancerGastroenterologyImmunotherapyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9573 Background: Mucosal melanoma is a rare, highly aggressive form of melanoma with extremely high recurrence rates, despite definitive surgical resection. Median RFS has been reported to be 5.4m, with RFS rates at 1 and 2 years of 10%, and 0%, respectively (Lian B, Si L, Cui C, et al. Phase II Randomized Trial Comparing High-Dose IFN-α2b with Temozolomide Plus Cisplatin as Systemic Adjuvant Therapy for Resected Mucosal Melanoma. Clinical Cancer Research 2013, 19(16):4488-4498). Currently there is no consensus on recommendations for adjuvant therapy. Data on the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) adjuvantly is lacking. Methods: We performed a single arm, multicenter clinical trial using “flip dose” ipilimumab (1mg/kg q3w x4 cycles),and nivolumab (3 mg.kg q3w x4 cycles), then Nivolumab 480 mg q4w x 11 cycles to complete a year of adjuvant therapy. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS), and the study had 85% power to detect an improvement in RFS between 5.5 and 9.5 months using a one-sided log rank test. Participants must have had R0/R1 resection <90 days prior to registration, and no prior systemic therapy (adjuvant radiation allowed), ECOG 0/1, no uncontrolled significant autoimmune disease or other invasive cancer. Patients were recruited through the Midwest Melanoma Partnership/Hoosier Oncology Network. Results: From 9/17 to 8/21, 44 patients were approached at 6 centers. Of these 9 were ineligible, and 35 were enrolled. Of these, 29 (83%) had R0 resections, and 7 (20%) had adjuvant radiation prior to enrollment. As of Dec 2021, 31 patients have completed the treatment phase. Of the 35 patients treated on study, 20 patients have recurred (7 local, 5 distant, 3 regional, 5 sites unconfirmed), 6 stopped therapy due to adverse effects, and 8 have died. The mean age of patients was 65.8 years and 21 (60.0%) were female. The primary site of disease was vulvovaginal N=12 (32.4%) patients, sinonasal N= 11 (29.7%), anorectal N= 9 (24.3%) and other site N= 5 (13.5%). Adjuvant radiation had been given in 7 pts. Driver mutations were rare, with only 3 (8.6%) patients having a KIT mutation, and one patient (2.9%) each having a NRAS or BRAF mutation. RFS rates at 1 and 2 years were 50% (95% CI 31-66%) and 37% (95% CI 19-55%), with OS rates at 1 and 2 years of 87% (95% CI 68-95%) and 68% (95% CI 46-83%). Median RFS was 10.3 m (95% CI5.7-25.8). Most common grade 3 adverse events were diarrhea (14%), hypertension (14%), hyponatremia (11%), with no grade 4/5 toxicities. Conclusions: Flip dose ipilimumab and nivolumab after resection is associated with outcomes improved over previously reported outcomes in the absence of therapy. Long term follow up is ongoing as are subgroup analyses and correlative studies. Clinical trial information: NCT03241186.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→