MAIN-CAV: Phase III randomized trial of maintenance cabozantinib and avelumab versus avelumab after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in patients (pts) with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC; Alliance A032001).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS4609 Background: First-line platinum-based chemotherapy followed by maintenance avelumab (Av) is the current preferred standard of care in patients (pts) with mUC who do not progress after platinum-based chemotherapy. There is an unmet need to further improve outcomes by combining Av with an effective, non-cross resistant therapy with non-overlapping toxicity. CABO is an oral inhibitor of MET, VEGFR and TAM family receptors involved in tumor growth, angiogenesis and immune cell regulation and has shown efficacy in UC in combination with PD-1/PD-1L1 inhibitors. We hypothesize that CABO-Av combination will be synergistic in pts with mUC with an acceptable safety profile and will improve upon the benefit seen with Av maintenance in mUC. Methods: MAIN-CAV is a phase III randomized, multicenter, international trial for locally advanced/mUC pts (including N3 only disease) who do not progress after 4-6 cycles of any platinum-based chemotherapy (gem-cis, gem-carbo, MVAC or ddMVAC). 654 adult pts will be randomized 1:1 within 3-10 weeks (wk) after last dose of chemotherapy to receive Av 800 mg IV every 2 wk or combination of Av and CABO 40 mg orally daily for up to 2 yrs. Key eligibility criteria include ECOG PS 0-1, no prior use of immunotherapy (exception of BCG), no central nervous system metastases, no major surgery within 4 wk, no uncontrolled hypertension or cardiovascular disorders. Pts will be stratified based on 1) best response to 1L therapy: complete response vs partial response vs stable disease and 2) presence or absence of visceral metastases. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) with assumptions of one-sided alpha of 0.025, power of 80%, median OS of 21 months (mo) on Av arm and hazard ratio (HR) of 0.75, thus hypothesizing a median OS of 28 mo on CABO-Av combination arm. Key secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, safety, tolerability, and activity of CABO-Av compared to Av alone based on RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST criteria and PD-L1 status of pts’ tumors. Quality of life (QOL) will be assessed using EQ-5D-5L, PROMIS-Fatigue 4a, EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-BLM30 between pts on CABO-avelumab vs avelumab alone. Biomarkers of response and resistance to Av will be assessed using baseline archival tissues, baseline and serial blood, ctDNA, stool and urine. Imaging studies will test correlation of established and new radiomic signatures with OS, adverse events and QOL and incorporate both radiologic and biologic features to predict outcomes. This trial would be the first to systematically address whether adding a multitargeted TKI, CABO to Av leads to improved clinical outcomes compared to Av alone. Clinical trial information: NCT05092958 .
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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.
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".