Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus axitinib (axi) versus sunitinib as first-line therapy for advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC): Analysis of progression after first subsequent therapy in KEYNOTE-426.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4513 Background: The randomized, open-label, phase 3 KEYNOTE-426 study (NCT02853331) met its primary and key secondary end points of improved OS, PFS, and ORR with pembro + axi versus sunitinib as first-line treatment for patients with advanced ccRCC. Extended follow-up (42.8-mo median follow-up) continued to show the superior efficacy of pembro + axi versus sunitinib in this patient population. We describe the results of PFS2 for all randomly assigned patients and across IMDC risk categories. Methods: Treatment-naive patients with advanced ccRCC, Karnofsky Performance Status Scale score ≥70% and measurable disease per RECIST v1.1 were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive pembro 200 mg IV every 3 weeks for up to 35 doses (̃2 y) + axi 5 mg orally twice daily or sunitinib 50 mg orally once daily on a 4-wk on/2-wk off schedule. The end point of this exploratory analysis was PFS2, defined as time from randomization to progression after first subsequent therapy or any-cause death. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate PFS2 and hazard ratios were estimated using a Cox regression model. Results: Of 861 patients, 432 were assigned to receive pembro + axi; 429, to sunitinib. Median time from randomization to the database cutoff date (January 11, 2021) was 42.8 mo (range, 35.6-50.6). Overall, 47.2% of patients (204/432) in the pembro + axi arm and 65.5% of patients (281/429) in the sunitinib arm received ≥1 line of subsequent anticancer therapy. For patients who received subsequent therapy, anti–PD-1/PD-L1 agents were the first subsequent treatment for 11.3% of patients (23/204) in the pembro + axi arm and 54.8% of patients (154/281) in the sunitinib arm. In the pembro + axi arm, 82.8% of patients (169/204) received a VEGF/VEGFR inhibitor as first subsequent therapy, as did 43.4% (122/281) in the sunitinib arm. PFS2 results are displayed in the Table. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis, PFS2 was longer for patients randomized to pembro + axi compared to sunitinib. Results were consistent across IMDC risk groups. These data support use of pembro + axi for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced ccRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT02853331. [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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".