Chrome Extension
WeChat Mini Program
Use on ChatGLM

Pembrolizumab Alone or with Chemotherapy Versus Cetuximab with Chemotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (KEYNOTE-048): a Randomised, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study.

The Lancet(2019)

Yale Univ | Inst Canc Res | Paracelsus Med Univ | Ctr Hosp Univ Montreal | Natl Canc Ctr Hosp East | Inst Canc Estado Sao Paulo | Univ Athens | Vall dHebron Univ Hosp | Univ Kansas | Oslo Univ Hosp | Med Univ Vienna | Royal Brisbane & Womens Hosp | Catalan Inst Oncol | Mahidol Univ | Univ Hosp | Univ Malaya | Natl Taiwan Univ Hosp | Unidad Invest Salud | Merck & Co Inc | Peter MacCallum Canc Ctr

Cited 1649|Views72
Abstract
Background Pembrolizumab is active in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression associated with improved response. Methods KEYNOTE-048 was a randomised, phase 3 study of participants with untreated locally incurable recurrent or metastatic HNSCC done at 200 sites in 37 countries. Participants were stratified by PD-L1 expression, p16 status, and performance status and randomly allocated (1:1:1) to pembrolizumab alone, pembrolizumab plus a platinum and 5-fluorouracil (pembrolizumab with chemotherapy), or cetuximab plus a platinum and 5- fluorouracil (cetuximab with chemotherapy). Investigators and participants were aware of treatment assignment. Investigators, participants, and representatives of the sponsor were masked to the PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) results; PD-L1 positivity was not required for study entry. The primary endpoints were overall survival (time from randomisation to death from any cause) and progression- free survival (time from randomisation to radiographically confirmed disease progression or death from any cause, whichever came first) in the intention-to-treat population (all participants randomly allocated to a treatment group). There were 14 primary hypotheses: superiority of pembrolizumab alone and of pembrolizumab with chemotherapy versus cetuximab with chemotherapy for overall survival and progressionfree survival in the PD-L1 CPS of 20 or more, CPS of 1 or more, and total populations and non-inferiority (noninferiority margin: 1.2) of pembrolizumab alone and pembrolizumab with chemotherapy versus cetuximab with chemotherapy for overall survival in the total population. The definitive findings for each hypothesis were obtained when statistical testing was completed for that hypothesis; this occurred at the second interim analysis for 11 hypotheses and at final analysis for three hypotheses. Safety was assessed in the as-treated population (all participants who received at least one dose of allocated treatment). This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02358031. Findings Between April 20, 2015, and Jan 17, 2017, 882 participants were allocated to receive pembrolizumab alone (n=301), pembrolizumab with chemotherapy (n=281), or cetuximab with chemotherapy (n=300); of these, 754 (85%) had CPS of 1 or more and 381 (43%) had CPS of 20 or more. At the second interim analysis, pembrolizumab alone improved overall survival versus cetuximab with chemotherapy in the CPS of 20 or more population (median 14.9 months vs 10.7 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.61 [95% CI 0.45-0.83], p=0.0007) and CPS of 1 or more population (12.3 vs 10.3, 0.78 [0.64-0.96], p=0.0086) and was non-inferior in the total population (11.6 vs 10.7, 0.85 [0.71-1.03]). Pembrolizumab with chemotherapy improved overall survival versus cetuximab with chemotherapy in the total population (13.0 months vs 10.7 months, HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.63-0.93], p=0.0034) at the second interim analysis and in the CPS of 20 or more population (14.7 vs 11.0, 0.60 [0.45-0.82], p=0.0004) and CPS of 1 or more population (13.6 vs 10.4, 0.65 [0.53-0.80], p<0.0001) at final analysis. Neither pembrolizumab alone nor pembrolizumab with chemotherapy improved progression-free survival at the second interim analysis. At final analysis, grade 3 or worse all-cause adverse events occurred in 164 (55%) of 300 treated participants in the pembrolizumab alone group, 235 (85%) of 276 in the pembrolizumab with chemotherapy group, and 239 (83%) of 287 in the cetuximab with chemotherapy group. Adverse events led to death in 25 (8%) participants in the pembrolizumab alone group, 32 (12%) in the pembrolizumab with chemotherapy group, and 28 (10%) in the cetuximab with chemotherapy group. Interpretation Based on the observed efficacy and safety, pembrolizumab plus platinum and 5-fluorouracil is an appropriate first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic HNSCC and pembrolizumab monotherapy is an appropriate first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive recurrent or metastatic HNSCC. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
More
Translated text
Key words
Cetuximab
PDF
Bibtex
AI Read Science
AI Summary
AI Summary is the key point extracted automatically understanding the full text of the paper, including the background, methods, results, conclusions, icons and other key content, so that you can get the outline of the paper at a glance.
Example
Background
Key content
Introduction
Methods
Results
Related work
Fund
Key content
  • Pretraining has recently greatly promoted the development of natural language processing (NLP)
  • We show that M6 outperforms the baselines in multimodal downstream tasks, and the large M6 with 10 parameters can reach a better performance
  • We propose a method called M6 that is able to process information of multiple modalities and perform both single-modal and cross-modal understanding and generation
  • The model is scaled to large model with 10 billion parameters with sophisticated deployment, and the 10 -parameter M6-large is the largest pretrained model in Chinese
  • Experimental results show that our proposed M6 outperforms the baseline in a number of downstream tasks concerning both single modality and multiple modalities We will continue the pretraining of extremely large models by increasing data to explore the limit of its performance
Try using models to generate summary,it takes about 60s
Must-Reading Tree
Example
Generate MRT to find the research sequence of this paper
Related Papers
Data Disclaimer
The page data are from open Internet sources, cooperative publishers and automatic analysis results through AI technology. We do not make any commitments and guarantees for the validity, accuracy, correctness, reliability, completeness and timeliness of the page data. If you have any questions, please contact us by email: report@aminer.cn
Chat Paper

要点】:本文报告了一项随机开放标签的III期临床试验(KEYNOTE-048),比较了帕博利珠单抗单独或联合化疗与西妥昔单抗联合化疗治疗复发性或转移性头颈鳞状细胞癌的效果,结果显示帕博利珠单抗及其联合化疗方案在总生存期和无进展生存期上均优于西妥昔单抗联合化疗,为头颈鳞状细胞癌的治疗提供了新的标准。

方法】:研究在37个国家200个地点进行,入组未经治疗的局部无法治愈的复发性或转移性头颈鳞状细胞癌患者。患者根据PD-L1表达、p16状态和体能状态分层并随机分配到帕博利珠单抗单独组、帕博利珠单抗联合化疗组或西妥昔单抗联合化疗组。主要终点是总生存率和无进展生存率。

实验】:研究共入组882名患者,其中帕博利珠单抗单独组301名,帕博利珠单抗联合化疗组281名,西妥昔单抗联合化疗组300名。在第二次中期分析时,帕博利珠单抗单独组在PD-L1表达≥20%和PD-L1表达≥1%的患者群体中均显示出对总生存率的改善,并且不逊色于西妥昔单抗联合化疗组。帕博利珠单抗联合化疗组在总人群、PD-L1表达≥20%和PD-L1表达≥1%的患者群体中的总生存率均优于西妥昔单抗联合化疗组。安全性评估显示,帕博利珠单抗单独组、帕博利珠单抗联合化疗组和西妥昔单抗联合化疗组分别有55%、85%和83%的患者出现3级或更高级别的副作用,其中帕博利珠单抗单独组和帕博利珠单抗联合化疗组各有8%的患者因副作用去世。