The prognostic impact of immune-related adverse events in real-world patients with metastatic melanoma treated with single-agent and combination immune checkpoint blockade.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
9542 Background: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM). Immune-related Adverse Events (irAEs) associated with ICB have been shown to correlate positively with survival outcomes across solid tumours. In MM, conclusions on the impact of irAE severity have been conflicting, and combination ICB therapy experience is limited to smaller cohorts. We sought to clarify these relationships using the Alberta Immunotherapy Database (AID). Methods: The AID provides a multi-centre, province-wide observational cohort comprising consecutive patients treated with ICB. We included adult patients with MM, treated with ICB (single agent nivolumab or pembrolizumab, or combination ipilimumab and nivolumab) at any line of therapy, agnostic to site of origin, from August 2013 to May 2020, with analysis in December 2021. The primary endpoint of interest was the identification of a relationship between development of irAEs and subsequent overall survival (OS, defined from time of ICB initiation). To minimize immortal time bias from poor prognosis patients who may have died prior to the development of irAEs, patients who died before 12 weeks were excluded from OS and time-to-next-treatment (TTNT) analysis. Adjusted Cox regression analyses were performed to determine the association of variables with OS. Results: Of 492 MM patients receiving ICB, 124 received combination ICB, 198 developed an irAE and 67 required hospitalization for an irAE. irAEs were more common in patients < 50 years old (p = 0.02), with ECOG 0 (p < 0.001) and normal albumin (p = 0.002). Median time to irAE development (2.6 months) and frequency of individual irAEs were consistent with the published literature. In the overall population, patients who experienced an irAE had longer median OS (56.3 vs 18.5mo, p < 0.0001), and TTNT (49.6 vs 12.9mo, p < 0.0001). This remained consistent in combination ICB-treated patients (median OS 56.3 vs 19mo, p < 0.0001). Patients hospitalized for an irAE had improved OS and TTNT over patients requiring only outpatient treatment (median OS NR vs 27.9mo, p = 0.0039), while ICB re-challenge after an irAE also improved OS (56.3 vs 31.5mo, p = 0.0093). Development of an irAE retained independent association with OS after adjusted multivariable regression (HR 0.376, p < 0.001). Conclusions: These data support the association of irAEs and improved survival outcomes in MM, including those patients treated with combination ICB. Among patients with irAE, hospitalization for irAE, and ICB re-challenge post-irAE, were further associated with improved outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".