MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396921377 · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2024.04.001

IMpassion132 double-blind randomised phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without atezolizumab for early relapsing unresectable locally advanced or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

2024· article· en· W4396921377 on OpenAlexaff
R. Dent, Fabrice André, Anthony Gonçalvès, Miguel Martín, Patrick Schmid, Fabio A.B. Schutz, Sherko Kümmel, Sandra M. Swain, Aslan Bilici, D. Loirat, Ricardo Villalobos-Valencia, S. Im, Y.H. Park, M. De Laurentis, Marco Colleoni, Valentina Guarneri, Giampaolo Bianchini, H. Li, Z. Machackova, João Mouta, Regula Deurloo, Xiaoliang Gan, Min Fan, Aruna Mani, A. Swat, J. Cortés

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)
FundersChugai PharmaceuticalDaiichi Sankyo EuropeGilead SciencesServierSeagenGenentechVeracyteJazz PharmaceuticalsIpsenQueen Mary University of LondonClovis OncologyEisaiNateraBaxaltaLes Laboratories Pierre FabreF. Hoffmann-La RocheAmgenBreast Cancer Research FoundationAriad PharmaceuticalsBayer HealthCareSanofiStrykerPfizerCelgeneAstraZenecaEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineAtezolizumabTriple-negative breast cancerOncologyMetastatic breast cancerInternal medicineChemotherapyDouble blindBreast cancerCancerImmunotherapyPlaceboPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors improve the efficacy of first-line chemotherapy for patients with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive unresectable locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (aTNBC), but randomised data in rapidly relapsing aTNBC are scarce. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IMpassion132 (NCT03371017) enrolled patients with aTNBC relapsing <12 months after last chemotherapy dose (anthracycline and taxane required) or surgery for early TNBC. PD-L1 status was centrally assessed using SP142 before randomisation. Initially patients were enrolled irrespective of PD-L1 status. From August 2019, enrolment was restricted to PD-L1-positive (tumour immune cell ≥1%) aTNBC. Patients were randomised 1:1 to placebo or atezolizumab 1200 mg every 21 days with investigator-selected chemotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were chemotherapy regimen (carboplatin plus gemcitabine or capecitabine monotherapy), visceral (lung and/or liver) metastases and (initially) PD-L1 status. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), tested hierarchically in patients with PD-L1-positive tumours and then, if positive, in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population (all-comer patients randomised pre-August 2019). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. RESULTS: Among 354 patients with rapidly relapsing PD-L1-positive aTNBC, 68% had a disease-free interval of <6 months and 73% received carboplatin/gemcitabine. The OS hazard ratio was 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.73-1.20, P = 0.59; median 11.2 months with placebo versus 12.1 months with atezolizumab). mITT and subgroup results were consistent. Median PFS was 4 months across treatment arms and populations. ORRs were 28% with placebo versus 40% with atezolizumab. Adverse events (predominantly haematological) were similar between arms and as expected with atezolizumab plus carboplatin/gemcitabine or capecitabine following recent chemotherapy exposure. CONCLUSIONS: OS, which is dismal in patients with TNBC relapsing within <12 months, was not improved by adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy. A biology-based definition of intrinsic resistance to immunotherapy in aTNBC is urgently needed to develop novel therapies for these patients in next-generation clinical trials.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations53
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersFrench-language works237,207