MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405050504 · doi:10.1016/j.esmoop.2024.103972

Atezolizumab monotherapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma: final analysis from the phase II IMvigor210 trial

2024· article· en· W4405050504 on OpenAlexaff
J. E. Rosenberg, M.D. Galsky, Thomas Powles, Daniel P. Petrylak, Joaquim Bellmunt, Y. Loriot, A. Necchi, Jean Hoffman‐Censits, José Luis Perez‐Gracia, Michiel S. van der Heijden, Robert Dreicer, Ignacio Durán, D Castellano, Alexandra Drakaki, Margitta Retz, Srikala S. Sridhar, P. Grivas, Evan Y. Yu, Peter H. O’Donnell, H.A. Burris, S. Mariathasan, Yi Shi, Erik T. Goluboff, Dean F. Bajorin

Bibliographic record

VenueESMO Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesFoundation MedicineXBiotechEMD SeronoGenentechNational Institutes of HealthHCA HealthcarePfizerIncyteModernaRevolution MedicinesGilead SciencesNational Cancer InstituteVertex PharmaceuticalsF. Hoffmann-La RocheEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaJounce TherapeuticsCelgeneArray BioPharmaAstellas PharmaTG TherapeuticsSeagenAgios Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsAtezolizumabMetastatic Urothelial CarcinomaUrothelial carcinomaOncologyMedicineUrothelial cancerInternal medicineUrologyPhase (matter)Bladder cancerCancerChemistryImmunotherapyNivolumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The IMvigor210 trial demonstrated clinical benefit and manageable toxicity with atezolizumab monotherapy [anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)] in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) in primary analyses. Final efficacy and safety results after long-term follow-up are reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II single-arm trial of atezolizumab monotherapy in patients with advanced UC included two cohorts: untreated patients ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy (cohort 1; n = 119) and those previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy (cohort 2; n = 310). Atezolizumab was administered i.v. (1200 mg every 21 days) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints were independent review facility-assessed confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 in cohort 1 and independent review facility-assessed ORR per RECIST 1.1 and investigator-assessed modified (m)RECIST in cohort 2. Overall survival (OS), efficacy by PD-L1 status, and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: At data cut-off (1 June 2023), the median survival follow-up was 96.4 months (range, 0.2-103.4 months) in cohort 1 and 46.2 months [0.2 (censored)-54.9 months] in cohort 2. In cohort 1, the ORR [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 23.5% (16.2% to 32.2%) in all patients and 28.1% (13.8% to 46.8%) in the PD-L1 tumor-infiltrating immune cell (IC)2/3 subgroup. Median OS (95% CI) was 16.3 months (10.4-24.5 months) overall and 12.3 months (6.0-49.8 months) in the PD-L1 IC2/3 subgroup. In cohort 2, the ORR (95% CI) was 16.5% (12.5% to 21.1%) per RECIST 1.1 and 19.7% (95% CI 15.4% to 24.6%) per mRECIST in all patients and 27.0% (18.6% to 36.8%) and 28.0% (19.5% to 37.9%), respectively, in the PD-L1 IC2/3 subgroup. Median OS (95% CI) was 7.9 months (6.7-9.3 months) in all patients and 11.9 months (9.0-22.8 months) in the IC2/3 subgroup. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 21.8% (cohort 1) and 18.7% (cohort 2); one treatment-related death occurred in cohort 1. CONCLUSIONS: With long-term follow-up, atezolizumab monotherapy demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy with durable responses in a subset of patients with metastatic UC; there were no new safety signals.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations28
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESMO OpenSame topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207