MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase Ib trial of erdafitinib (E) combined with enfortumab vedotin (EV) following platinum and PD-1/L1 inhibitors for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) with FGFR2/3 genetic alterations (GAs).

2024· article· en· W4391333747 on OpenAlexaff
Rohit Jain, Jazlyn Heiligh, Youngchul Kim, Richard Piekarz, Lorraine Pelosof, Yuanquan Yang, Anishka D'souza, Risa Liang Wong, Laura Graham, Sumati Gupta, Anna Park, Timothy W. Synold, Guru Sonpavde

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRashTolerabilityCisplatinInternal medicineOncologyNauseaChemotherapyAdverse effectCarboplatinPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

625 Background: Erdafitinib (E) is a treatment option in mUCpatients with somatic FGFR2/3 GAs after progression on platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC). Enfortumab Vedotin (EV) is approved as a single agent to treat mUC patients following prior PBC and PD1/L1 inhibitors or as second-line therapy for cisplatin-ineligible patients. Retrospective studies suggest that the activity of EV is not compromised by FGFR2/3 GAs. E and EV have different mechanisms of activity, and toxicities are mostly non-overlapping. Hence, there is rationale to evaluate the feasibility of combination E + EV, to overcome the difficulties of resistance and sequencing agents in mUC patients with FGFR2/3 GAs. Methods: This is an ongoing, single arm, multicenter, dose-escalation and expansion study of combination E + EV evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and antitumor activity in patients with mUC harboring somatic FGFR2/3 GAs who have progressed after PBC and/or PD1/L1 inhibitor therapies. Dose escalation phase aims to identify the maximum tolerable dose and recommended phase 2 dose of EV at dose levels of 1 mg/kg and 1.25 mg/kg in combination with E at 8 mg/day as shown in the table. Preliminary safety, PK, and efficacy data for Dose Level (DL) 1 and 2 are presented in this abstract. Results: As of data cutoff, based on 3+3 design, total 8 patients are enrolled and finished dose limiting toxicity (DLT) period (1st cycle). Six patients were enrolled in DL1 with 1 DLT (skin rash) and 2 patients in DL2. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) included hyperphosphatemia (88%), mucositis (88%), hypercalcemia (75%), high AST (75%), hand foot syndrome (75%), peripheral neuropathy (75%), alopecia (63%), diarrhea (63%), hypoalbuminemia (63%) and hypomagnesemia (63%). Grade 3 TRAE included hand foot syndrome (50%), anemia (17%), rash (17%), anorexia (17%) and paronychia (17%). One patient developed grade 4 Stevens-Johnson syndrome related to EV which subsequently improved. PK data are available for all 6 subjects in DL1. The average steady-state Cmin of E and monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) was 1430 ± 639 ng/mL and 1.4 ± 0.9 ng/mL, respectively, and the average Cmax of MMAE was 3.9 ± 0.9 ng/mL at DL1. All 8 patients are evaluable for response, and best response is partial response in all. Detailed safety and additional efficacy data will be presented. Conclusions: Combination E + EV is feasible and preliminarily exhibits antitumor activity. Dose escalation is ongoing to identify the MTD or recommended dose for expansion of the trial. Clinical trial information: NCT04963153 . [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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.442
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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