Nivolumab plus chemotherapy or ipilimumab in gastroesophageal cancer: exploratory biomarker analyses of a randomized phase 3 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First-line nivolumab-plus-chemotherapy demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival versus chemotherapy for advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma with programmed death ligand 1 combined positive score ≥ 5, meeting both primary end points of the randomized phase 3 CheckMate 649 trial. Nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab provided durable responses and higher survival rates versus chemotherapy; however, the prespecified OS significance boundary was not met. To identify biomarkers predictive of differential efficacy outcomes, post hoc exploratory analyses were performed using whole-exome sequencing and RNA sequencing. Nivolumab-based therapies demonstrated improved efficacy versus chemotherapy in hypermutated and, to a lesser degree, Epstein–Barr virus-positive tumors compared with chromosomally unstable and genomically stable tumors. Within the KRAS-altered subgroup, only patients treated with nivolumab-plus-chemotherapy demonstrated improved OS benefit versus chemotherapy. Low stroma gene expression signature scores were associated with OS benefit with nivolumab-based regimens; high regulatory T cell signatures were associated with OS benefit only with nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab. Our analyses suggest that distinct and overlapping pathways contribute to the efficacy of nivolumab-based regimens in gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Exploratory post hoc analysis of molecular residual disease (MRD) from the ADAURA trial of adjuvant osimertinib in patients with resected EGFR-mutated stage IB–IIIA non-small cell lung cancer shows that MRD detection predicts disease recurrence with long term adjuvant osimertinib treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".