MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Outcomes of patients with bacillus Calmette-Guérin–unresponsive high-risk non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer who demonstrated nonresponse to pembrolizumab in KEYNOTE-057: A post hoc analysis.

2024· article· en· W4403129728 on OpenAlexaff
Roger Li, Joshua Linscott, Girish S. Kulkarni, Andrea Necchi, M. Roumiguié, Eric A. Singer, Edward Uchio, Joost L. Boormans, Aiwen Xing, Margot Van den Sigtenhorst, Ekta Kapadia, Ashish M. Kamat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabBladder cancerBacillus (shape)Post-hoc analysisOncologyPost hocInternal medicineCancerImmunotherapyMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4597 Background: The phase 2 KEYNOTE-057 trial (NCT02625961) demonstrated that pembrolizumab can serve as a bladder-sparing option for patients (pts) with high-risk non–muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) who are unresponsive to bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) and are unable or unwilling to undergo radical cystectomy (RC). However, the outcomes (especially related to progressive disease [PD]) of pts who do not respond to bladder-sparing therapies (BSTs), including pembrolizumab, are of concern. We conducted a post hoc analysis of the KEYNOTE-057 trial to assess the clinical outcomes of pts who experienced persistent or recurrent high-risk NMIBC despite pembrolizumab therapy and subsequently received either RC or other BST. Methods: Pts with BCG-unresponsive carcinoma in situ (CIS) and/or papillary-only tumors who had nonresponse (persistent or recurrent high-risk NMIBC) to pembrolizumab were evaluated in the following groups: (1) pts who received upfront RC (≤4 mo of treatment failure confirmation); (2) pts who received delayed RC (>4 mo after treatment failure or received other BST before RC); and (3) pts who received BST alone (received BST alone or no reported subsequent treatment). Analyses included PFS (lack of development of muscle-invasive bladder cancer [MIBC] or metastatic disease or death due to PD) and OS, indexed from the date of pembrolizumab nonresponse. Pts with upfront RC found to have upstaging to MIBC (due to initial understaging) were excluded from the PFS analysis unless they developed subsequent PD. Pathologic outcomes in pts undergoing upfront vs delayed RC were also evaluated. Results: Of the 144 pts who were nonresponders to pembrolizumab, 39 underwent upfront RC, 33 underwent delayed RC, and 72 underwent BST alone. Of pts who underwent upfront RC, the pathologic stages were T0, 26%; NMIBC (Ta, T1, CIS), 64%; and MIBC (T2, T3, T4), 10%. Of pts who underwent delayed RC, the pathologic stages were T0, 15%; NMIBC, 67%; and MIBC, 15%. Median time from pembrolizumab nonresponse to data cutoffs (cohort A: May 30, 2023; cohort B: Oct 20, 2022) was 59.7 mo (range, 10.9-80.7). Median PFS was not reached across all 3 groups. The 36-mo PFS rates were 78% (95% CI, 60-89) for upfront RC, 68% (95% CI, 49-82) for delayed RC, and 86% (95% CI, 74-92) for BST alone. Median OS was not reached across all 3 groups. Conclusions: Oncologic outcomes were similar between pts treated with BST or RC following nonresponse to pembrolizumab. Pts who underwent upfront vs delayed RC had similar pathologic outcomes. Data from this analysis suggest that pts were not harmed by BST following pembrolizumab and that a window of safety may exist for implementing second-line BST prior to RC. Clinical trial information: NCT02625961 .

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→