Survivals following discontinuation of PD-1 inhibitor treatment in advanced melanoma patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate overall survival post-treatment discontinuation survival (OS PTD ) in advanced melanoma patients started on immunotherapy. This retrospective study included all unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma patients who had permanent treatment discontinuation after receiving at least one cycle of palliative-intent programmed death-1 ± cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 inhibitor treatment from 2014 to 2019. Indications of permanent treatment discontinuation included treatment completion, toxicity or progression. OS PTD was defined as a time of permanent treatment discontinuation to the time of death. Our study ( N = 96) had 27, 12 and 57 patients who discontinued PD-1 inhibitor treatment due to treatment completion, toxicity and progression, respectively. Median treatment durations received for the treatment completion, toxicity and progression groups were 24, 6 and 3 months, respectively. As expected those patients who had disease progression on immunotherapy had very poor survival compared to those that completed treatment or stopped due to toxicity. A multivariable Cox model excluding the patients who progressed indicated no significant OS PTD differences between the toxicity and treatment completion group (HR, 0.894; 95% CI, 0.232-3.449; P = 0.871) who received single or dual immunotherapy. Our real-world study highlighted similar, durable survival at PD-1 inhibitor discontinuation due to either toxicity or treatment completion, despite longer treatment duration received in the completion group than toxicity group. Patients with progression on PD-1 inhibitor treatment have very poor survival. Our findings must be interpreted with caution due to its retrospective nature and small sample size.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".