Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33942954›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2021

Phase I Trial of Cemiplimab, Radiotherapy, Cyclophosphamide, and Granulocyte Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor in Patients with Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Hani Babiker, Irene Brana, Daruka Mahadevan, Taofeek Owonikoko, Emiliano Calvo, Danny Rischin, Victor Moreno, Kyriakos P Papadopoulos, Marka Crittenden, Silvia Formenti and 11 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase I
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Tumor cell intrinsic mechanisms of immune escape.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Cancer Therapy.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 11 institutions in 3 countries.

Hani BabikerDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Irene BranaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Vall D'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain.
Daruka MahadevanDepartment of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Mays Cancer Center, University of Texas Health, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Taofeek OwonikokoDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Emiliano CalvoSTART Madrid, Centro Integral Oncológico Clara Campal, Madrid, Spain.
Danny RischinDepartment of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and the University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Victor MorenoSTART Madrid, Hospital Fundación Jiménez Díaz (FJD), Madrid, Spain.
Kyriakos P PapadopoulosSTART, San Antonio, Texas, USA.
Marka CrittendenEarle A. Chiles Research Institute, Robert W. Franz Cancer Center, Providence Portland Medical Center and The Oregon Clinic, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Silvia FormentiDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, USA.
Jordi GiraltDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Vall D'Hebron University Hospital, Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain.
Pilar GarridoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Ainara SoriaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Asunción Hervás-MorónDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
Kosalai Kal MohanRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tarrytown, New York, USA.
Matthew FuryRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tarrytown, New York, USA.
Israel LowyRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tarrytown, New York, USA.
Melissa MathiasRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Tarrytown, New York, USA.
Minjie FengRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Basking Ridge, New Jersey, USA.
Jingjin LiRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Basking Ridge, New Jersey, USA.
Elizabeth StankevichRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Basking Ridge, New Jersey, USA.
Regeneron (United States) · USHospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal · ESVall d'Hebron Institute of OncologyEmory University · USHospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz · ESProvidence Portland Medical Center · USSouth Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUniversity of Arizona Cancer CenterUniversity of Melbourne · AUWeill Cornell Medicine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

lessons learnedCemiplimab in combination with radiation therapy, cyclophosphamide, and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor did not demonstrate efficacy above what can be achieved with other PD-1 inhibitor monotherapies in patients with refractory and metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. The safety profile of cemiplimab combination therapy was consistent with previously reported safety profiles of cemiplimab monotherapy. No new safety signal was observed.

backgroundRefractory and metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) generally does not respond to PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy. Cemiplimab is a human anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody. An expansion cohort enrolled patients with R/M HNSCC in a phase I study combining cemiplimab plus radiation therapy (RT), cyclophosphamide, and granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF).

methodsPatients with R/M HNSCC refractory to at least first-line therapy and for whom palliative RT is clinically indicated received cemiplimab plus RT, cyclophosphamide, and GM-CSF. The co-primary objectives were the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of cemiplimab plus RT, cyclophosphamide, and GM-CSF in 15 patients with R/M HNSCC.

resultsFifteen patients were enrolled. Patients discontinued treatment due to progression of disease. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade were fatigue (40.0%), constipation (26.7%), and asthenia, dyspnea, maculo-papular rash, and pneumonia (each 20%). The only grade ≥3 TEAE that occurred in two patients was pneumonia (13.3%). By investigator assessment, there was one partial response (6.7%); disease control rate was 40.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.3-67.7; five patients with stable disease); seven patients had progressive disease, and two were not evaluable. Median progression-free survival by investigator assessment was 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.7-4.7).

conclusionThe regimen demonstrated tolerability but not efficacy above that which can be achieved with anti-PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy for R/M HNSCC.

Indexed as

Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorHead and Neck NeoplasmsAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCyclophosphamideGranulocytesHumansMacrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorSquamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and NeckAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedcemiplimabCyclophosphamideGranulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorMacrophage Colony-Stimulating FactorCemiplimabHead and neckRadiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID33942954
PMCPMC8417861
OpenAlexW3157439465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.