MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Initial safety and efficacy of PDL1V (PF-08046054), a vedotin-based ADC targeting PD-L1, in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) HNSCC.

2025· article· en· W4410804010 on OpenAlexaff
Maura L. Gillison, Marc Oliva, Christophe Le Tourneau, Ramy Saleh, Amita Patnaik, Jonathan W. Riess, Neeltje Steeghs, Justin Call, Afshin Dowlati, Elisa Fontana, A. Oberoi, Nuria Kotecki, Anna Minchom, Sebastian Ochsenreither, Kaïssa Ouali, Anna Spreafico, Andrea Zivi, Shivani Gupta, Rong Zhang, Lisle Nabell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePembrolizumabOncologyInternal medicineImmunotherapyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6033 Background: PDL1V is a novel investigational antibody-drug conjugate that delivers monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) to cells that express programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) without anticipated checkpoint blockade. Immunogenic cell death via the MMAE payload can be further amplified by traditional immune checkpoint inhibitors, providing strong scientific rationale for combination with pembrolizumab. The objective of Part D of the phase 1 trial is to assess the safety/tolerability and preliminary antitumor activity of PDL1V and pembrolizumab combination in patients with R/M HNSCC. Methods: C5851001 (NCT05208762) includes a phase 1 safety run-in cohort (Part D) enrolling patients with untreated R/M HNSCC with PD-L1 CPS ≥1 and no prior therapy with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies in any setting. Measurable disease per RECIST v1.1 and ECOG PS ≤1 were required. The first patient group received PDL1V 1.25 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 every 21 days (2Q3W) using adjusted ideal body weight (AIBW). Once safety was demonstrated, a second cohort was initiated at 1.5 mg/kg 2Q3W AIBW. All patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary objectives of this study are safety/tolerability and pharmacokinetics. A secondary objective is antitumor activity. Results: As of December 20, 2024, 14 patients were dosed; median age was 61 years (range 36–76). Eight patients received 1.25 mg/kg and 6 received 1.5 mg/kg; 92.9% were male, 71.4% had ECOG PS 0, 64.3% were P16 positive oropharyngeal, and 57.1% had CPS 1–<20. Eight patients remain on active therapy at the data cut time. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. The most frequent PDL1V treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were fatigue and nausea (50.0% each), peripheral sensory neuropathy (35.7%), diarrhea (28.6%), and anemia, constipation, decreased appetite, muscle spasms, pneumonitis, and pyrexia (14.3% each); pembrolizumab TRAEs were fatigue (42.9%), diarrhea, and nausea (28.6% each); and abdominal pain, decreased appetite, peripheral sensory neuropathy, pneumonitis, and pyrexia (14.3% each). The most frequent grade ≥3 TRAEs for either agent were diarrhea (14.3%) and anemia, decreased appetite, fatigue, and neutropenia (7.1% each). Treatment-related immune-mediated AEs by investigator assessment were observed in 7.1% of patients; 7.1% grade 3. Investigator-assessed, objective response rate at this time for 14 response-evaluable patients was 50.0%; complete response (CR) rate was 21.4%. The median duration of response has not been reached. Conclusions: The combination of PDL1V and pembrolizumab was generally well tolerated with no DLTs. Early encouraging objective responses were observed in half of the patients treated, including 21.4% with a CR. Enrollment in multiple combination expansion cohorts in PD-L1 expressing tumors is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05208762 .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→