MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385553990 · doi:10.1158/2767-9764.crc-23-0284

Tusamitamab Ravtansine in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors: Phase I Study of Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Antitumor Activity Using Alternative Dosing Regimens

2023· article· en· W4385553990 on OpenAlexaff
Josep Tabernero, Philippe L. Bédard, Yung‐Jue Bang, María Vieito, Min‐Hee Ryu, Nathalie Fagniez, Mustapha Chadjaa, Christine Soufflet, Nina Masson, Anas Gazzah

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersSanofi
KeywordsMedicineDosingPharmacokineticsAdverse effectInternal medicineGastroenterologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Tusamitamab ravtansine is an antibody–drug conjugate that targets carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule 5 (CEACAM5) and delivers a cytotoxic maytansinoid payload. In a phase I dose-escalation study, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 100 mg/m2 every 2 weeks (Q2W). Here we report results for two alternative schedules. Experimental Design: Adults ages ≥18 years (range, 34–73) with locally advanced/metastatic solid tumors (N = 43; colon/rectum, 29; stomach, 7; pancreas, 4; other, 3) expressing/likely to express CEACAM5 received intravenous tusamitamab ravtansine 120–170 mg/m2 [loading dose (LD)], then 100 mg/m2 Q2W (Q2W-LD, n = 28), or 120–190 mg/m2 fixed dose [every 3 weeks (Q3W), n = 15]. The primary endpoint was dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during cycles 1–2 (Q2W-LD) and cycle 1 (Q3W). Results: Reversible DLTs were observed in 2 of 9 patients (grade 2 keratopathy; grade 2 keratitis) with 170 mg/m2 in Q2W-LD and in 2 of 3 patients (grade 2 keratopathy; grade 3 transaminase elevation) with 190 mg/m2 in Q3W. Nineteen (67.9%) patients in Q2W-LD and 13 (86.7%) patients in Q3W experienced treatment-related adverse events (AE); 3 of 43 patients discontinued treatment because of AEs. The most common AEs were asthenia, gastrointestinal complaints, keratopathy, keratitis, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. In this small, heavily pretreated population, no confirmed responses were observed; however, stable disease occurred in 35.7% of patients in Q2W-LD and 40.0% of patients in Q3W. Conclusions: Tusamitamab ravtansine had a favorable safety profile with both alternative administration schedules; MTDs were 170 mg/m2 (LD) followed by 100 mg/m2 Q2W, and 170 mg/m2 Q3W as a fixed dose. (NCT02187848). Significance: The collective results of this phase I dose-escalation study will inform further studies of tusamitamab ravtansine in patients with solid tumors with CEACAM5 expression, including patients with non–small cell lung cancer.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 venueCancer Research CommunicationsSame topicRadiopharmaceutical Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207