MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

558 CTX130 allogeneic CRISPR-Cas9–engineered chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells in patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma: Results from the phase 1 COBALT-RCC study

2022· article· en· W4308399396 on OpenAlexaff
Sumanta Pal, Ben Tran, John Haanen, Michael E. Hurwitz, Adrian G. Sacher, Neeraj Agarwal, Nizar Tannir, Elizabeth Budde, Simon J. Harrison, Sebastian Klobuch, Sagar S. Patel, Mary Lee Dequeant, Verena Karsten, Kaitlyn Cohen, Ellen B. Gurary, Henia Dar, Anna Ma, A. Sharma, Samer A. Srour

Bibliographic record

VenueRegular and Young Investigator Award Abstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenal cell carcinomaFludarabineMedicineClear cell renal cell carcinomaInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Chimeric antigen receptorOncologyGastroenterologyCyclophosphamideCancer researchImmunotherapyChemotherapyCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background</h3> Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common subtype of renal tumors. Patients with ccRCC who fail checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have a poor prognosis. Preclinical studies identified substantial expression of CD70 in ccRCC tumor samples. Here, we report results from the Phase 1 dose-escalation study of CTX130™, a CD70-targeting allogeneic CAR T cell therapy in patients with ccRCC. <h3>Methods</h3> COBALT-RCC (NCT04438083) is a Phase 1, open-label, multicenter, global study evaluating safety and efficacy of CTX130 in patients ≥18y with advanced (unresectable or metastatic), relapsed, or refractory (R/R) ccRCC and prior exposure to both CPIs and TKIs. Patients received standard lymphodepleting chemotherapy with fludarabine 30mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 500mg/m2 for 3 days, followed by CTX130 infusion. <h3>Results</h3> As of May 2, 2022, 14 patients with a median age of 64.5y (range, 54-77) were treated with CTX130. All patients had stage IV disease, and received a median of 3 (range, 1-6) prior treatments. Six patients had documented refractory disease at study entry. Median CD70 expression level on the tumors was 100% (range, 1-100%). Patients received CTX130 at dose levels (DLs) ranging from 3x10<sup>7</sup> to 9x10<sup>8</sup> CAR T cells. Overall, expansion occurred across all DLs. An emerging relationship between higher CAR T exposure and disease control was observed. CTX130 had an acceptable safety profile; there were no dose-limiting toxicities across all DLs. Seven (50%) patients experienced grade (Gr) 1-2 cytokine release syndrome (CRS); there was no Gr≥3 CRS. Three patients experienced serious adverse events (SAEs) related to CTX130; all were episodes of CRS. Three patients had SAEs of infections, all unrelated to CTX130, including a Gr5 pneumonia with Gr4 dyspnea resulting in death. No patients experienced immune effector cell associated neurotoxicity syndrome, graft versus host disease, or hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. One patient (7.7%) had a durable complete remission (CR) maintained at 18+ months and 9 (69.2%) patients had stable disease (SD) with 4 patients (30.8%) in SD at 4 months. The disease control rate (CR + partial response + SD) was 76.9%. <h3>Conclusions</h3> This first-in-human clinical trial exploring CD70 CAR T-cell therapy in ccRCC showed an excellent safety profile with no unexpected on-target off-tumor toxicities and encouraging antitumor activity. To our knowledge, this durable CR is the first to be achieved with allogeneic CAR T cell therapy in patients with R/R solid tumors and represents a proof-of-concept for further exploration of CD70-targeted CAR T cells in ccRCC and other CD70+ malignancies. <h3>Trial Registration</h3> This study is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT04438083 <h3>Ethics Approval</h3> The study was performed in accordance with ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki and are consistent with ICH Guidelines for GCP and applicable regulatory requirements. This study was approved by all participating Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). The Ethics Committee/IRB Approval Numbers/IDs for each participating institution are as follows: City of Hope (189473), Huntsman Cancer Institute (00133621), MD Anderson Cancer Center (2020-0151), Yale Cancer Center (20202730), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (20-5071), Netherlands Cancer Institute (METC20.1170/M20CTX), and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (20/16). All participants provided informed consent before taking part in the study.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegular and Young Investigator Award AbstractsSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207