20 Evaluating intermediate endpoints for overall survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: an IMDC study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In Phase 3 trials, the assessment for primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) necessitates extended follow-up periods, a larger pool of events, and higher associated costs. Hence, we sought to determine whether shorter intermediate (IEs) such as Objective Response (OR), Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) and Time to Next Therapy (TTNT) are associated with OS in patients receiving immune checkpoint (ICI)-based therapy. Methods We included all International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) patients who received contemporary first line(1L) ICI from 2013 to 2023. IEs were defined from ICI start until drug cessation or death for TTF, and initiation of next line or death for TTNT, or censored at date of last follow-up. OR included investigators-assessed complete or partial response per RECIST1.1 criteria. First, we assessed the endpoint correlations across all follow-up times of individual patient data using Kendall’s Tau (KT) correlation by a Clayton copula. A KT >0.49 indicates a strong correlation (Wicklin R., 2023). Then we evaluated associations of OS with TTF and TTNT status at the 6-month landmark using Cox regression adjusting for IMDC risk groups, metastatic sites, histology, age, and prior nephrectomy, stratified by ICI type and years of ICI start. The KT correlation was estimated by the R GJRM package (https://www.r-project.org/). All other statistical analyses were done with SAS 9.4 software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Results The cohort consisted of 1667 patients with a median follow-up of 15.4 months (IQR: 7.1-28.6). For the 6-month landmark analysis in OS, patients who died or had less than 6 months of follow-up were excluded, affecting 278 for OR, 373 for TTF, and 380 for TTNT. Median age at 1L start was 63 years (IQR: 56-70), with 73% being male and 65% undergoing nephrectomy before starting 1L. A total of 1132 patients received dual ICI, while 535 received an ICI+TKI combination. Over the entire follow-up of individual patient data, the Kendall’s Tau correlation was 0.49 (95%CI: 0.45-0.52) for TTF with OS and 0.67 (95%CI: 0.64-0.69) for TTNT with OS. The Kendall’s Tau correlations between endpoints were also similar in subgroup analyses by IMDC risk group and type of regimen and the strongest in the ICI+TKI subgroup with a Kendall’s Tau correlation of 0.73(0.66-0.78). On the 6-month OS landmark analysis (Table), patients who discontinued their 1L regimen had poor OS (adjusted HR: 2.77 (95%CI: 2.16-3.55)). Additionally, those who transitioned to a 2L therapy within the first 6 months showed worse OS, reflected by an HR of 2.82 (2.22-3.59). Patients who did not have an objective response also had worse OS (adjusted HR: 2.74 (95%CI: 2.15-3.49)). On the other hand, patients with an objective response had an 18-month OS rate (equivalent of 12-month OS post the 6-month landmark) of 91% (95%CI: 88%-93%) vs 74% (95%CI: 70%-78%) for those with no response at 6 months. Table. Landmark analysis of OS from 6 months of post therapy initiation, according to OR, TTF and TTNT event status at 6 months, in whole cohort and by IMDC and treatment groups. Conclusions Our study explored TTF, TTNT and OR as clinical IEs for OS. TTNT demonstrated the strongest association with OS, particularly in the ICI+TKI subgroup, making it a potentially clinically meaningful intermediate endpoint for evaluating treatment efficacy in ICI-based regimens.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".