MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Lenvatinib (len) plus pembrolizumab (pembro) in patients with advanced melanoma that progressed on anti–PD-(L)1 therapy: Over 4 years of follow-up from the phase 2 LEAP-004 study.

2024· article· en· W4400272169 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Arance, Steven O’Day, Luis de la Cruz‐Merino, Teresa M. Petrella, Rahima Jamal, Lars Ny, Ana Carneiro, Alfonso Berrocal-Jaime, Iván Márquez‐Rodas, Anna Spreafico, Victoria Atkinson, Fernanda Costa Svedman, Chinyere E. Okpara, Kevin Lawlor, Scott J. Diede, Tobias Neff, Georgina V. Long

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabLenvatinibOncologyMelanomaInternal medicinePhases of clinical researchClinical trialDermatologyImmunotherapyCancerCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9559 Background: PD-1 inhibitors such as pembro are a standard-of-care option for advanced melanoma, and effective treatments are needed for disease that progresses on anti–PD-(L)1–based therapy. Previous results from the single-arm, open-label, phase 2 LEAP-004 study (NCT03776136) showed that len + pembro had antitumor activity in patients (pts) with advanced melanoma that progressed on prior anti–PD-(L)1–based therapy. With a median follow-up of 15.3 mo, the ORR was 21.4% and median DOR was 8.3 mo. Results from LEAP-004 led to the inclusion of len + pembro in treatment guidelines for pts with advanced melanoma and confirmed progression on a PD-(L)1 inhibitor. Here, we present results from LEAP-004 with over 4 years of follow-up. Methods: Eligible pts were aged ≥18 years, had unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, had ≥1 measurable lesion, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and had confirmed disease progression within 12 weeks of the last dose of anti–PD-(L)1 therapy given alone or in combination for ≥2 doses. All pts received len 20 mg PO QD + ≤35 doses of pembro 200 mg IV Q3W. The primary end point was ORR per RECIST v1.1 by BICR. Secondary end points included DOR and PFS per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, OS, and safety. Results: 103 pts were enrolled and received treatment. Median time from first dose to data cutoff (Oct 11, 2023) was 52.0 months (range, 48.8-55.7). ORR in the overall population was 24.3% (95% CI, 16.4-33.7), with 5 pts (4.9%) having a complete response and 20 (19.4%) a partial response. In key subgroups, ORR was 33.3% (10/30; 95% CI, 17.3-52.8) in pts with progression on prior anti–PD-1 + anti–CTLA-4 therapy and 10.7% (3/28; 95% CI, 2.3-28.2) in pts with BRAF-mutant tumors who received prior BRAF/MEK-directed therapy for metastatic disease. Median DOR in the overall population was 8.5 mo (range, 3.2-40.8) and an estimated 35% of responders remained in response at ≥12 mo. Median PFS was 4.2 mo (95% CI, 3.5-6.3); 24-mo PFS rate was 10.1%. Median OS was 14.0 mo (95% CI, 10.8-18.3); 24-mo OS rate was 29.7%. Efficacy outcomes in pts with mucosal (n = 11) and acral lentiginous (n = 8) melanoma were consistent with the overall population. Any-grade treatment-related AEs occurred in 99 pts (96.1%). Grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs occurred in 51 pts (49.5%). No new treatment-related deaths occurred since prior analysis (1 pt had died because of treatment-related decreased platelet count). Conclusions: With over 4 years of follow up, len + pembrocontinued to show antitumor activity in pts with advanced melanoma and confirmed progression after ≥2 doses of anti–PD-(L)1-based therapy. Safety remained consistent with previous reports, with no new or unexpected safety signals. These results support len + pembro as a potential treatment option for advanced melanoma after anti–PD-(L)1-based therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03776136 .

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→