MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408678115 · doi:10.3389/pore.2025.1612084

Neoadjuvant leukocyte interleukin injection immunotherapy improves overall survival in low-risk locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma –the IT-MATTERS study

2025· article· en· W4408678115 on OpenAlexaff
Eyal Talor, József Tı́már, Philip T. Lavin, J. Cipriano, Dušan Marković, Andrea Ladányi, А. А. Карпенко, Igor Bondarenko, Srboljub Stošić, Hrvoje Šobat, A. Zhukavets, Nazim Imamovic, Chih‐Yen Chien, Magdalena Bańkowska-Woźniak, Mihály Kisely, Rajko Jović, James Young, Sheng‐Po Hao

Bibliographic record

VenuePathology & Oncology Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineSurgeryChemoradiotherapyHead and neck squamous-cell carcinomaGastroenterologyNeoadjuvant therapyRandomizationRandomized controlled trialRadiation therapyHead and neck cancerConfidence intervalCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The randomized controlled pivotal phase 3 study evaluated efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant complex biologic, Leukocyte Interleukin Injection (LI), administered for 3 consecutive weeks pre-surgery, in treatment naïve resectable locally advanced primary squamous cell carcinoma of oral cavity and soft palate. Randomization 3:1:3 to LI+/-CIZ (cyclophosphamide, indomethacin, and zinc)+SOC, or SOC (standard of care) alone. LI-treated patients received 400 IU (as interleukin-2 equivalent; 200 IU peritumorally, 200 IU perilymphatically) sequentially, daily 5 days/week for 3 weeks before surgery. All subjects were to receive SOC. Post-surgery, patients with low risk for recurrence were to receive radiotherapy, while those with high risk received concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Median follow-up was 56 months. There were 923 ITT (Intent-to-Treat) subjects (380 ITT low-risk and 467 ITT high-risk). Pre-surgery objective early response (45 objective early responders; 5 complete responses [CRs], 40 partial responses [PRs], confirmed by pathology at surgery. LI (+/- CIZ) had 8.5% objective early responders (45/529 ITT) and 16% objective early responders (34/212 ITT low-risk) vs. no reported SOC objective early responders (0/394 ITT). Objective early responders significantly lowered death rate to 22.2% (ITT LI-treated), 12.5% (ITT low-risk LI + CIZ + SOC), while the ITT low-risk SOC death rate was 48.7%. Thus, objective early response impacted overall survival (OS); proportional hazard ratios were 0.348 (95% CI: 0.152-0.801) for ITT low-risk LI-treated, 0.246 (95% CI: 0.077-0.787) for ITT low-risk LI + CIZ + SOC. ITT low-risk LI + CIZ + SOC demonstrated significant OS advantage vs. ITT low-risk SOC (unstratified log-rank p = 0.048; Cox hazard ratio = 0.68; 95% CI: 0.48-0.95, Wald p = 0.024 [controlling for tumor stage, tumor location, and geographic region]). Absolute OS advantage increased over time for ITT low-risk (LI + CIZ + SOC)-treated vs. ITT low-risk SOC: reaching 14.1% (62.7% vs. 48.6%) at 60 months, with 46.5 months median OS advantage (101.7 months vs. 55.2 months), respectively. Quality of life benefit for complete responders sustained for >3 years post LI treatment. Percent treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable among all treated groups. No excess safety issues were reported for LI over SOC alone post-surgery. NCT01265849, EUDRA:2010-019952-35.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePathology & Oncology ResearchSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207