A study of the efficacy and toxicity outcomes of extended durvalumab dosing in patients with stage III unresectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) during the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Durvalumab following chemoradiation in unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has led to improved outcomes. The schedule of administration has been determined by pharmacokinetic studies. This study evaluates real-world efficacy and safety outcomes of extended dosing (ED) vs. standard dosing (SD) of durvalumab. METHODS: Stage III NSCLC patients treated at the Cancer center of Southeastern Ontario with consolidative durvalumab from March 2017-December 2020 were included. Patient characteristics and outcomes were evaluated through retrospective review. Comparisons were made using chi-square and t-tests. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to analyze overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 35 patients were included; 15 (43%) switched to ED. Distant recurrence rates were higher in the ED group (53% vs. 20%, p = 0.07), with no differences in the sites of disease recurrence. A similar proportion of patients were alive in the ED vs. SD group (93% vs. 80%, p = 0.3), with no significant difference in OS. There were less grade 3 or greater immune-related adverse events in the ED group (0% vs. 20%). Treatment discontinuation occurred in 47% vs. 50% in the ED vs. SD groups, respectively, owing to toxicity in 20% of patients in the ED group vs. 40% in the SD group. CONCLUSIONS: Extended dosing has similar efficacy and toxicity to standard dosing; however, there was a higher rate of toxicity necessitating discontinuation in the SD group, which may have impacted the clinical decision-making to switch to ED. Our data is limited by a small sample size and should be further validated in larger cohorts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".