MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A first-in-human trial of intravesical enfortumab vedotin (EV), an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC): Interim results of a phase 1 study (EV-104).

2023· article· en· W4379336690 on OpenAlexaff
Ashish M. Kamat, Yair Lotan, Morgan Rouprêt, Gary D. Steinberg, Brant A. Inman, Thomas Powles, Joan Palou Redorta, Sima P. Porten, Girish S. Kulkarni, Edward Uchio, Seema Rao Gorla, Gabriel P. Haas, Yu Yao, Yen Lin Chia, Matthew Birrenkott, Max R. Kates

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBladder cancerCystectomyUrologyTolerabilityInternal medicineInterim analysisOncologyAdverse effectCancerClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4596 Background: A majority of patients (pts) with bladder cancer present with non-muscle invasive disease; for pts with high-risk tumors, standard of care (SOC) is resection of tumor followed by intravesical Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG). Once pts experience recurrence and develop BCG-unresponsive disease, SOC is radical cystectomy (RC), which many pts are unfit for or refuse. EV is an ADC directed to Nectin-4, which is highly expressed in bladder tumors. Intravenous EV has demonstrated survival benefit in pts with previously treated la/mUC. In preclinical models with intravesical administration, EV was well tolerated and showed antitumor activity. Here we present the first clinical data for intravesical administration of EV in pts with NMIBC. Methods: EV-104 (NCT05014139) is an ongoing phase 1, open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation and expansion study of intravesical EV evaluating the safety, tolerability, PK, and antitumor activity of intravesical EV in pts with high-risk BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with carcinoma in situ (CIS) with or without papillary disease who are ineligible for or refuse RC. Dose escalation phase aims to identify the MTD or recommended dose of intravesical EV at the following dose levels: 125mg, 250mg, 500mg, and 750mg. Pts receive intravesical EV weekly for 6 weeks in the induction phase, followed by 9 monthly maintenance doses. Preliminary safety, PK, and efficacy data for 125mg and 250mg doses are presented in this abstract. Results: As of data cutoff (1 Dec 2022), 6 pts received intravesical EV across 2 dose levels: 4 pts at 125mg completed 6 induction cycles and proceeded to maintenance; 2 pts at 250mg had received at least 3 doses of intravesical EV. Of 6 pts across doses, there were no Grade ≥3 TRAEs, treatment-related SAEs, TRAEs leading to dose reduction or discontinuation. 4 of 6 pts (3 at 125mg and 1 at 250mg) experienced ≥1 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) of Grade 1 or 2. Most common TRAEs were fatigue (3 of 6) and micturition urgency (2 of 6). As of data cutoff, no DLTs were observed for 125mg; the DLT evaluation period for 250mg was not complete. All blood PK analyses (ADC and unconjugated MMAE) for pts at 125mg were undetectable; no PK data was available for 250mg. Of 4 pts receiving 125mg of intravesical EV, 3 achieved CR and continue in response. The fourth pt discontinued tx due to persistent disease but remains on study. Pts at 250mg had not been evaluated for response at data cutoff. Detailed safety and additional efficacy data will be presented. Conclusions: Preliminary data from EV-104 show intravesical EV is well tolerated with no evidence of systemic exposure at 125mg. Preliminary antitumor activity was observed at 125mg with 3 of 4 pts achieving a CR. Dose escalation is ongoing to identify the MTD or recommended dose for dose expansion. Clinical trial information: NCT05014139 .

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.395 · 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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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