2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology Genitourinary (ASCO-GU) Cancers Symposium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From January 25-27, 2024, San Francisco, along with a virtual global audience, played host to the 20 th annual American Society of Clinical Oncology Genitourinary Cancers (ASCO-GU) Symposium.This highly anticipated event drew together specialists in GU cancer from diverse corners of the world.With a focal point on cutting-edge science, interdisciplinary expertise, and evidence-based practices, this year's symposium became a nexus for advancing knowledge in the realms of GU cancer treatment, research, and patient care.Following this symposium, on January 31, the Canadian Urological Association (CUA) convened an online webinar where Canadian experts highlighted pivotal research findings in bladder, kidney, and prostate cancers.In the subsequent sections, we distill the essence of the latest breakthroughs unveiled at ASCO-GU 2024.The entire webinar is available for viewing on UROpedia Canada, and meeting abstracts can be accessed through the ASCO meeting library. KIDNEY CANCERDr. Jeffrey Graham provided a comprehensive overview of recent adjuvant and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) trial developments.In the adjuvant space, CheckMate 914, a phase 3, randomized, double-blind trial, investigated adjuvant nivolumab vs. placebo for localized RCC in patients at high risk of relapse postnephrectomy.The study comprised two distinct parts: Part A examined adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. placebo, while Part B focused on nivolumab monotherapy vs. placebo.Disappointingly, results from Part A, evaluating six months of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. placebo, yielded negative outcomes for the primary endpoint of disease-free survival (DFS). 1 Similarly, results from Part B showed no discernible difference in 18-month DFS between the groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-1.21,p=0.396). 2 Subgroup analysis revealed no overall benefit of adjuvant nivolumab, although potential value emerged in sarcomatoid-differentiated patients and those positive for PD-L1.In terms of toxicity, the nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination resulted in higher rates of immune-mediated toxicity, where 19% of patients in the combination arm needed high dose of steroids to manage immune-mediated adverse events (AE) compared to 6% and 2% with nivolumab and placebo, respectively.Results from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-564 study, assessing adjuvant pembrolizumab vs. placebo in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), unveiled promising overall survival (OS) outcomes.3 Building on prior evidence of improved DFS post-nephrectomy, adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a notable 5% absolute improvement in survival at 48 months, marking a significant milestone as the first adjuvant trial in kidney cancer to show OS benefit.3,4 The one-year treatment with pembrolizumab led to an improvement in OS (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.87,p=0.002) in high-risk ccRCC patients compared to placebo.Encouragingly, this OS benefit extended across clinical subgroups, including patients with M0 disease, M1 NED, PD-L1 CPS <1 or CPS ≥1, and those with sarcomatoid features.This is the first adjuvant therapy to demonstrate an improvement in OS in high-risk RCC.Updated DFS data continued to demonstrate a benefit with pembrolizumab compared to placebo at the 48-month followup.Noteworthy is the absence of new safety concerns, although it is crucial to highlight that 9.4% of pembrolizumab-treated patients experienced grade 3-4 AEs, and 7.6% required high-dose steroids.This information is paramount for patient counselling on adjuvant treatment.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.131 | 0.064 |
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".