MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

ARC101-P1-101: A first-in-human phase 1 study of ARC101, a next generation T cell engager (TCE), in patients with advanced solid tumors.

2025· article· en· W4410810149 on OpenAlexaff
Prachi Bhave, Meena Okera, Michelle Frances Morris, Manish Sharma, Kyriakos P. Papadopoulos, Stéphanie Lheureux, Christian Kollmannsberger, Laura Martinez-Solano, Crysti Iarossi, Jennifer Teti, Michael Streit, Oladapo Yeku

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancer researchSolid tumorOncologyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS2671 Background: T-cell Engagers (TCEs) are emerging as a promising immuno-therapeutic modality in the treatment of solid tumors, demonstrating outstanding potency and a manageable safety profile. Claudin 6 (CLDN6) is an oncofetal protein that has recently emerged as a particularly attractive tumor-associated antigen (TAA) for TCE therapy because of its highly tumor-restricted pattern of expression. ARC101 is a bispecific antibody that targets CLDN6 on tumor cells with high specificity and selectivity, and CD3 on T cells. In pre-clinical models, ARC101 demonstrated potent cytolytic activity at low concentrations against a panel of CLDN6-expressing tumor cells in vitro and an ovarian cancer xenograft in vivo. Methods: First-in-human, multicenter, phase 1 study ARC101-P1-101 (NCT06672185) aims to determine the optimal dosing, safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary antitumor efficacy of ARC101 as monotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic CLDN6 expressing solid tumors. The study will be conducted according to the Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) design in two parts: Part 1 (dose escalation) and Part 2 (dose expansion). Part 1 is designed to select the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD), Recommended-Phase 2-Dose (RP2D) and dosing schedule of ARC101. Part 1 will start with an ‘Accelerated Titration Phase’, with cohorts of at least one, but no more than three patients and a fixed dose, intravenous regimen. Once a single event of clinically significant toxicity of Grade ≥2 occurs, the ‘Standard Titration Phase’ will be initiated with cohorts of at least three patients per ARC101 target dose level. Once immune-related toxicity is observed, the regimen may be changed to a ‘Fractionated Step-up Dosing’ IV regimen. The study design allows for backfill cohorts and intra-patient dose escalations. Part 2 will further explore the safety, PK/PD characteristics, and preliminary efficacy of ARC101 administered at the RP2D and schedule identified in Part 1 in patients with testicular and ovarian cancer. Key eligibility criteria include patients with any advanced or refractory solid tumor malignancy that expresses CLDN6 and is metastatic or unresectable. Patients must be ≥18 years of age and have Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1. Patients must have received standard therapy for advanced or metastatic disease, and disease must be measurable per Response Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 or evaluable. Mandatory requirement of a pre-study tumour sample for IHC analysis will facilitate the exploratory objective of biomarker analysis, including correlating CLDN6 expression with treatment response. The study is actively enrolling participants for the dose escalation phase. Contact clinicaltrials@thirdarcbio for additional information. Clinical trial information: NCT06672185 .

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.366 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCAR-T cell therapy research→French-language works237,207→