Results from the randomized KEYNOTE-355 study of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for Asian patients with advanced TNBC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-355 study (NCT02819518), pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus placebo plus chemotherapy among patients with previously untreated locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10 tumors. We analyzed outcomes for the subgroup of patients enrolled in Asia in KEYNOTE-355. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo (2:1 randomization) every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus investigator's choice chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were PFS per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and OS. Among patients enrolled in Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Malaysia and Taiwan (pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy, n = 113; placebo plus chemotherapy, n = 47), 117 (73.1%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and 56 (35.0%) had PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10. Median time from randomization to data cutoff (June 15, 2021) was 43.8 (range, 36.8‒53.2) months (intent-to-treat [ITT] population). Hazard ratios (HRs [95% CI]) for PFS in the CPS ≥ 10, CPS ≥ 1, and ITT populations were 0.48 (0.24‒0.98), 0.58 (0.37‒0.91), and 0.66 (0.44‒0.99), respectively. Corresponding HRs (95% CI) for OS were 0.54 (0.28‒1.04), 0.62 (0.40‒0.97), and 0.57 (0.39‒0.84). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 77.9% versus 78.7% of patients with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy. No grade 5 AEs occurred. Clinically meaningful improvement in PFS and OS with manageable toxicity were observed with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients enrolled in Asia with previously untreated, inoperable or metastatic TNBC.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02819518.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".