MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase 2 KEYNOTE-057 cohort C: Pembrolizumab (pembro) with vibostolimab or favezelimab for patients (pts) with high-risk (HR) bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG)-unresponsive non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC).

2023· article· en· W4324136914 on OpenAlexaff
Neal D. Shore, Shilpa Gupta, Girish S. Kulkarni, Andrea Necchi, Hema Kishore Dave, Ekta Kapadia, Qing Zhao, Ashish M. Kamat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabCohortBladder cancerOncologyInternal medicineCancerUrologyImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS591 Background: The PD-1 inhibitor pembro showed antitumor activity in cohort A of the phase 2 KEYNOTE-057 study (NCT02625961), with 41% of pts with HR BCG-unresponsive carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the bladder ± papillary tumors achieving a CR at 3 months with a median DOR of 16.2 months. Based on these results, pembro was approved in the United States for treatment of pts with BCG-unresponsive HR NMIBC with CIS ± papillary tumors who are ineligible for or have elected not to undergo radical cystectomy (RC). However, novel combinations that improve the efficacy of pembro are needed. Immune checkpoints TIGIT and LAG-3 have been shown to contribute to treatment resistance in many cancers, and their inhibition may enhance the activity of pembro. Cohort C of KEYNOTE-057 will evaluate the efficacy and safety of coformulations of pembro and TIGIT inhibitor vibostolimab or LAG-3 inhibitor favezelimab in pts with HR BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with CIS ± papillary tumors. Methods: Key eligibility criteria include adults with histologically confirmed HR NMIBC that is unresponsive to BCG (defined as persistent or recurrent CIS alone or with Ta/T1 ≤12 months of completion of adequate BCG therapy) who are ineligible for or elect not to undergo RC, have CIS ± papillary tumors at baseline (CIS alone, Ta + CIS or T1 + CIS), and have an ECOG score of 0-2. Approximately 60 pts will be randomly assigned 1:1 to Arm 1 (coformulation of pembro 200 mg and vibostolimab 200 mg) or Arm 2 (coformulation of pembro 200 mg and favezelimab 800 mg) IV Q3W (≤35 administrations) until central pathology-confirmed ≥T1 at any time point or persistent or recurrent CIS or high-grade ≥Ta at the 24-week efficacy review or thereafter. Pts with central pathology–confirmed low-grade pTa at any time point may continue treatment following resection of visible tumors. In the absence of disease persistence/recurrence or progression, treatment will continue until unacceptable toxicity, decision to withdraw, or administrative reasons. Tumor evaluations will be performed Q12W until year 2, then Q24W thereafter for up to 5 years. The primary efficacy end point is 12-month CR rate of HR NMIBC as determined by cystoscopy, cytology, biopsy, and radiologic imaging by central pathology and radiology review. Secondary efficacy end points include DOR of HR NMIBC in responders; overall CR rate and CR rate at 3 and 6 months; PFS to worsening of grade, stage, or death; PFS to muscle-invasive or metastatic disease or death; and OS. The safety objective will characterize the safety and tolerability in all pts who received ≥1 dose of study treatment. Efficacy will be evaluated in all pts who received ≥1 dose of study treatment and have a baseline evaluation consisting of pre-enrollment cystoscopy, TURBT/biopsy, urine cytology, and baseline CT urography imaging. Clinical trial information: NCT02625961 .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→