IMMU-08. Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in pediatric patients with high-grade CNS malignancies: efficacy, safety, biomarker, and pharmacokinetic results from Checkmate 908
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: Limited data exist regarding checkpoint inhibitor efficacy for pediatric CNS malignancies. METHODS: CheckMate 908 is an open-label, sequential-arm, phase 1b/2 study investigating nivolumab (NIVO) and NIVO + ipilimumab (IPI) in 5 cohorts of pediatric patients previously treated with standard-of-care (NCT03130959). Patients received NIVO-3mg/kg Q2W or NIVO-3mg/kg + IPI-1mg/kg Q3W (4 doses) followed by NIVO-3mg/kg Q2W. Primary endpoints included OS (newly diagnosed DIPG) and PFS (other CNS cohorts); secondary endpoints included other efficacy metrics/safety. Exploratory endpoints included pharmacokinetics/biomarker analyses. Comparisons between treatments/cohorts were not planned. RESULTS: At data cutoff (13-Jan-2021), 166 patients received NIVO (n=85) or NIVO+IPI (n=81) at median (m) ages of 10.0yrs (range, 1-21) and 11.0yrs (1-21), respectively. In newly diagnosed DIPG, mOS (80% CI) was 11.7mos (10.3-16.5) with NIVO (n=23) and 10.8mos (9.1-15.8) with NIVO+IPI (n=22). In recurrent/progressive HGG, mPFS (80% CI) was 1.7mos (1.4-2.7) with NIVO (n=16) and 1.3mos (1.2-1.5) with NIVO+IPI (n=15). In relapsed/resistant medulloblastoma, mPFS (80% CI) was 1.4mos (1.2-1.4) with NIVO (n=15) and 2.8mos (1.5-4.5) with NIVO+IPI (n=15). In relapsed/resistant ependymoma, mPFS (80% CI) was 1.4mos (1.4-2.6) with NIVO (n=12) and 4.6mos (1.4-5.4) with NIVO+IPI (n=10). In other recurrent/progressive CNS tumors, mPFS (95% CI) was 1.2mos (1.1-1.3) with NIVO (n=19) and 1.6mos (1.3-3.5) with NIVO+IPI (n=19). Median treatment duration was 2.1mos (range, 0-41.7+ [NIVO]/0-29.6+ [NIVO+IPI]). Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 14.1% (NIVO) and 27.2% (NIVO+IPI) of patients. NIVO and IPI first dose trough concentrations were lower in youngest and lowest-weight patients. Baseline tumor PD-L1 expression was not associated with survival. Tumor mutational burden was high in 1 patient (NIVO+IPI) with HGG (OS=11.0mos). CONCLUSIONS: NIVO±IPI demonstrated no clinical benefit in pediatric patients with high-grade CNS malignancies, consistent with available historical data. The safety profiles were manageable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".