MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract LB118: Evidence of tumor response in orbital lesions treated with tebentafusp in metastatic uveal melanoma patients

2023· article· en· W4365511759 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus O. Butler, Takami Sato, Friedegund Meier, Ramakrishna Edukulla, Sarah Stanhope, Fraser S Peck, Jessica C. Hassel

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMelanomaClinical trialResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsPhases of clinical researchInternal medicineOncologyPathologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Tebentafusp, a bispecific (gp100 x CD3) ImmTAC that can redirect T cells to target gp100+ melanoma cells, has shown a superior overall survival (OS) benefit compared to investigator choice for HLA-A*02:01+ patients (pts) with untreated metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM). Although local control rates for primary UM are high, a minority of patients with mUM have recurrent or untreated orbital disease. Here we present safety and efficacy from tebentafusp treated mUM pts with orbital lesions including intraocular lesions. Methods: Tumor response according to RECIST v1.1 and ocular Adverse Events (AEs) were assessed in a pooled analysis of mUM pts with orbital lesions from 3 tebentafusp trials: IMCgp100-01 (Phase (Ph) 1/2, 19 2L+ mUM pts), IMCgp100-102 (Ph 1/2 2L+ mUM, 146 pts) and IMCgp100-202 (Ph3 1L mUM, 245 tebentafusp pts). Pre-treatment biopsies, taken prior to the IMCgp100-202 trial, were analyzed by immunohistochemistry for gp100 and CD3+ or CD8+ T cell infiltration prior to tebentafusp treatment. Results: In the 3 clinical trials, 12 mUM pts with radiologically detectable orbital lesions received tebentafusp, the majority of which were intra-ocular. All lesions were stable or had achieved shrinkage. 5/12 pts had orbital target lesions (TL), of which 4/5 had achieved tumor shrinkage (best % change -3 to -40) and 1/5 had no change in tumor size. All non-target orbital lesions were stable or achieved a complete response. 9 eye disorder AEs occurred in 5 pts, the majority of which were G1. The most common (7/9) AEs were extra-ocular local edema. One G3 eye pain AE, in a post eviscerated eye, did not resolve and occurred in the setting of disease progression resulting in treatment discontinuation. All other eye disorder AEs recovered and none led to tebentafusp discontinuation. 37 primary UM and 195 liver metastasis baseline biopsies were evaluated. Expression of gp100 in primary UM and mUM was high (95% and 80%, respectively). CD3+ and CD8+ T cell numbers were generally lower in primary UM compared to liver metastasis (median CD3: 231 and 504 cells/mm2, p=0.035; CD8: 121 and 238 cells/mm2, p=0.53, respectively). Conclusions: Following tebentafusp treatment, tumor reduction or stabilization of all orbital lesions including intra-ocular lesions were observed. Most AEs were extra-ocular mild local edema. Primary UM showed a high level of gp100 expression and also T cell infiltration. These preliminary signals of tebentafusp activity in orbital disease, including intra-ocular lesions, suggest a role for tebentafusp as a neoadjuvant therapy in UM and warrant further investigation. Citation Format: Marcus O. Butler, Takami Sato, Friedegund Meier, Ramakrishna Edukulla, Sarah Stanhope, Fraser S. Peck, Jessica C. Hassel. Evidence of tumor response in orbital lesions treated with tebentafusp in metastatic uveal melanoma patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr LB118.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207