Estimating efficacy of favezelimab plus pembrolizumab relative to pembrolizumab in anti–PD-1–refractory Hodgkin lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Favezelimab plus pembrolizumab had promising efficacy in anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)-refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma in MK-4280-003; however, the contribution of favezelimab was unclear. Here, we assessed the relative contribution of favezelimab by comparison with data from participants treated with only pembrolizumab beyond progression in KEYNOTE-087. Participants in MK-4280-003 had received ≥2 doses of anti-PD-1 therapy and progressed <12 weeks of last dose. Participants eligible from KEYNOTE-087 had received >2 doses of pembrolizumab beyond progression, and progressed <12 weeks of last dose. Participants received pembrolizumab 200 mg plus favezelimab 200 mg or 800 mg, or pembrolizumab 200 mg IV every 3 weeks. Change in target lesion size and response per International Working Group 2007 criteria were assessed. Baseline tumor size was reset at first progression for KEYNOTE-087. A bootstrapping method compared change in target lesion size between groups. Twenty-seven participants from MK-4280-003 and 81 from KEYNOTE-087 were included. Objective response rates were 37% (95% confidence interval [CI], 15-51) for favezelimab plus pembrolizumab, and 2% (95% CI, 0-6) for pembrolizumab alone. A clinically meaningful reduction (≥50%) in target lesion size was observed in 13 (48%) vs 4 participants (5%), respectively. The mean change from baseline in target lesion size was -49% and -0.4%. In the bootstrapping analysis, 99.4% of samples showed greater decrease in tumor burden with favezelimab plus pembrolizumab. Favezelimab plus pembrolizumab had a higher response rate and greater reduction in tumor burden vs pembrolizumab alone in anti-PD-1-refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma, suggesting favezelimab contributed substantially to efficacy in MK-4280-003. The trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03598608 and #NCT02453594.
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 | 0.021 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".