Telisotuzumab vedotin monotherapy in patients with previously treated c-Met–overexpressing non-squamous <i>EGFR</i> wildtype advanced NSCLC: Primary analysis of the LUMINOSITY trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
103 Background: Approximately 25% of patients (pts) with non-squamous (NSQ) EGFR wildtype (WT) NSCLC have c-Met protein overexpression (Ansell et al. 2022 CRUK), which is associated with a poor prognosis (Liang, Wang. Onco Targets Ther. 2020). Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V) is a c-Met–directed antibody-drug conjugate comprising the mAb telisotuzumab and the microtubule polymerization inhibitor monomethyl auristatin E. The phase 2 LUMINOSITY trial (NCT03539536) aimed to identify the c-Met–overexpressing (OE) NSCLC population best suited to Teliso-V and expand selected group(s) for further evaluation of efficacy. We report on the primary analysis for pts with c-Met OE NSQ EGFRWT NSCLC. Methods: This phase 2, non-randomized, multicenter study enrolled pts with locally advanced/metastatic c-Met OE NSCLC, ≤2 prior lines of therapy (chemotherapy [CTx] + immunotherapy [IO] or sequential CTx + IO), and ≤1 line of chemotherapy. c-Met OE (Ventana MET [SP44] clinical trial assay [CTA]) was defined as ≥25% tumor cells with 3+ staining (high: ≥50% 3+; intermediate [int]: 25 to <50% 3+). Teliso-V was dosed at 1.9 mg/kg IV Q2W. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) by independent central review per RECIST v1.1. Results: 172 pts with NSQ EGFR WT NSCLC received ≥1 dose of Teliso-V and comprised the safety population; 161 (c-Met high, 78; c-Met int, 83) were included in baseline and efficacy analyses. Median age was 64 yrs (range 33–83), 69% were male, and 70% had ECOG PS 1. 97.5% had prior platinum and 82.0% had prior immune checkpoint inhibitor. Efficacy data are presented in Table below. ORR was 34.6% (c-Met high), 22.9% (c-Met int), 28.6% (overall). Median DOR was 9.0 mo (c-Met high), 7.2 mo (c-Met int), 8.3 mo (overall). Most common any-grade treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (30%), peripheral edema (16%), and fatigue (14%). Grade 5 TRAEs occurred in 2 pts (interstitial lung disease, respiratory failure). Conclusions: Teliso-V has shown compelling and durable responses in pts with c-Met OE NSQ EGFR WT NSCLC, especially in pts with c-Met high. Teliso-V had an acceptable safety profile that was clinically manageable, which is consistent with previous data. Clinical trial information: NCT03539536 . [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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".