MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321597883 · doi:10.2217/fon-2023-0007

Plain language summary of the CheckMate 816 study results: nivolumab plus chemotherapy given before surgery for non–small-cell lung cancer

2023· article· en· W4321597883 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick M. Forde, Jonathan Spicer, Shun Lu, Mariano Provencio, Tetsuya Mitsudomi, Mark M. Awad, Enriqueta Felip, Stephen Broderick, Julie R. Brahmer, Steven Swanson, Keith Kerr, Changli Wang, Tudor–Eliade Ciuleanu, Gene B. Saylors, Fumihiro Tanaka, Hiroyuki Ito, Ke-Neng Chen, Moïshe Liberman, Everett E. Vokes, Janis M. Taube, Cécile Dorange, Junliang Cai, Joseph Fiore, Anthony Jarkowski, David Balli, Mark Sausen, Dimple Pandya, C. Calvet, Nicolas Girard

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNivolumabMedicineChemotherapyLung cancerCancerInternal medicineOncologyImmunotherapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is this summary about? In this article, we summarize results from the ongoing phase 3 CheckMate 816 clinical study that were published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2022. The goal of CheckMate 816 was to find out if nivolumab, an immunotherapy that activates a person’s immune system (the body’s natural defense system) to fight cancer, plus chemotherapy works better than chemotherapy alone when given before surgery in people with non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that can be removed surgically (resectable NSCLC).What happened in the study? Adults who had not previously taken medications to treat NSCLC and whose cancer could be removed with surgery were included in CheckMate 816. During this study, a computer randomly assigned the treatment each person would receive before surgery for NSCLC. In total, 179 people were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus chemotherapy, and 179 people were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy alone. The researchers assessed whether people who received nivolumab plus chemotherapy lived longer without the cancer geting worse or coming back and whether there were any cancer cells left in the tumor and lymph nodes removed by surgery. The researchers also assessed how adding nivolumab to chemotherapy affected the timing and outcomes of surgery and whether the combination of these drugs was safe.What were the results? Researchers found that people who took nivolumab plus chemotherapy lived longer without the cancer getting worse or coming back compared with those who took chemotherapy alone. More people in the nivolumab plus chemotherapy group had no cancer cells left in the tumor and lymph nodes removed by surgery. Most people went on to have surgery in both treatment groups; the people who took nivolumab plus chemotherapy instead of chemotherapy alone had less extensive surgeries and were more likely to have good outcomes after less extensive surgeries. Adding nivolumab to chemotherapy did not lead to an increase in the rate of side effects compared with chemotherapy alone, and side effects were generally mild and manageable.What do the results of the study mean? Results from CheckMate 816 support the benefit of using nivolumab plus chemotherapy before surgery for people with resectable NSCLC. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02998528 (ClinicalTrials.gov)To read the full Plain Language Summary of this article, click here to view the PDF.Link to original article hereMore information about the CheckMate 816 study can also be found at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02998528.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1020.028

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture OncologySame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207