MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance for advanced urothelial carcinoma (aUC): Long-term outcomes from the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial in patients (pts) with high body mass index (BMI).

2024· article· en· W4391303377 on OpenAlexaff
Jeanny B. Aragon‐Ching, Daniel P. Petrylak, Srikala S. Sridhar, Shilpa Gupta, Petros Grivas, Thomas Powles, Howard Gurney, Natalia Jacob, Karin Tyroller, Silke Guenther, Joaquim Bellmunt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineJavelinUrothelial carcinomaBody mass indexAvelumabInternal medicineOncologyUrologyBladder cancerCancerImmunotherapyPembrolizumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

600 Background: Avelumab 1L maintenance is recommended as standard of care by international treatment guidelines for pts with aUC that has not progressed with 1L platinum-based chemotherapy, based on level 1 evidence from the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (NCT02603432). In the trial, avelumab 1L maintenance + best supportive care (BSC) significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs BSC alone (median OS, 23.8 vs 15.0 mo; HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.63-0.91]; 2-sided p=0.0036). The long-term safety of avelumab 1L maintenance was also demonstrated. It is estimated that 25% of the world’s population will have BMI ≥30 by 2035, and high BMI is a risk factor for bladder cancer. We report post hoc analyses of long-term outcomes from JAVELIN Bladder 100 in pts with high BMI (≥30) at baseline. Methods: Eligible pts with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic UC without progression after 4-6 cycles of 1L platinum-based chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to receive avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 wk + BSC (n=350) or BSC alone (n=350). The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included PFS and safety. Results: At data cutoff (June 4, 2021), median follow-up was ≥38 mo in both arms. In the avelumab + BSC and BSC alone arms, 67 and 55 pts had high BMI at baseline, respectively. In these pts, median OS was 20.8 mo (95% CI, 16.9-34.4) with avelumab + BSC vs 12.7 mo (95% CI, 8.1-26.6) with BSC alone (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.49-1.21]); 2-y OS rates were 47.8% vs 37.6%, respectively. Median PFS by investigator was 5.6 mo (95% CI, 3.7-7.5) with avelumab + BSC vs 2.1 mo (95% CI, 1.9-4.0) with BSC alone (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.42-0.97]); 2-y PFS rates were 23.5% vs 11.3%, respectively. Long-term safety in pts with high BMI was generally consistent with the overall safety population (Table). Conclusions: This exploratory analysis shows the long-term efficacy and tolerability of avelumab 1L maintenance in pts with high BMI in JAVELIN Bladder 100, with no new safety concerns identified. These results further support the use of avelumab 1L maintenance as standard of care in pts with aUC who are progression free after 1L platinum-based chemotherapy, including pts with high BMI. Clinical trial information: NCT02603432 . [Table: see text]

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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