Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36612250›Full record

ArticleCancers2022

Results of PD-L1 Analysis of Women Treated with Durvalumab in Advanced Endometrial Carcinoma (PHAEDRA).

Deborah Smith, Kristy P Robledo, Sonia Yip, Michelle M Cummins, Peey-Sei Kok, Yeh Chen Lee, Michael Friedlander, Sally Baron-Hay, Catherine Shannon, Jermaine Coward and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

20 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Deborah SmithMater Pathology, Mater Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8420-1824
Kristy P RobledoNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Sonia YipNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Michelle M CumminsNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Peey-Sei KokNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4910-4615
Yeh Chen LeeNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2009-8263
Michael FriedlanderPrince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales and Royal Hospital for Women, Randwick, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
Sally Baron-HayRoyal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9748-1458
Catherine ShannonMater Cancer Centre, South Brisbane, QLD 4101, Australia.
Jermaine CowardICON Cancer Centre, South Brisbane, QLD 4101, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2309-9379
Philip BealeChris O'Brien Lifehouse, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Geraldine GossMonash Medical Centre, Melbourne, VIC 3168, Australia.
Tarek MeniawySir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1457-6137
Janine LombardCalvary Mater Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW 2298, Australia.
Amanda B SpurdleQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Herston, QLD 4006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1337-7897
John AndrewsNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Martin R StocklerNational Health and Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW 2050, Australia.
Linda MileshkinPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia.
Yoland AntillCabrini Health, Malvern, Melbourne, VIC 3144, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6366-5523
Australia New Zealand Gynaecological Oncology Group (ANZGOG)
The University of Sydney · AUCabrini Hospital · AUCalvary Mater Newcastle Hospital · AUCancer Council Queensland · AUChris O’Brien Lifehouse · AUMater Health Services · AUMonash Medical Centre · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AUQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute · AURoyal Hospital for Women · AURoyal North Shore Hospital · AUSir Charles Gairdner Hospital · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

Amanda Spurdle was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) Fellowship Funding ID1061778 and ID1177524AstraZeneca (Australia) N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Women with advanced endometrial carcinoma (EC) with mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency have improved outcomes when treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors; however, additional biomarkers are needed to identify women most likely to respond. Scores for programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1), immunohistochemical staining of tumor (TC+), immune cells (IC+) and presence of tumor-associated immune cells (ICP) on MMR deficient (n = 34) and proficient (n = 33) EC from women treated with durvalumab in the PHAEDRA trial (ANZGOG1601/CTC0144) (trial registration number ACTRN12617000106336, prospectively registered 19 January 2017) are reported and correlated with outcome. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses and area under the ROC curve were used to determine optimal cutpoints. Performance was compared with median cutpoints and two algorithms; a novel algorithm derived from optimal cutpoints (TC+ ≥ 1 or ICP ≥ 10 or IC+ ≥ 35) and the Ventana urothelial carcinoma (UC) algorithm (either TC+ ≥ 25, ICP > 1 and IC+ ≥ 25 or ICP = 1 and IC+ = 100). The cutpoint ICP ≥ 10 had highest sensitivity (53%) and specificity (82%), being prognostic for progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.01), while the optimal cutpoints algorithm was associated with overall survival (p = 0.02); these results were not significant after adjusting for MMR status. The optimal cutpoints algorithm identified non-responders (p = 0.02) with high sensitivity (88%) and negative predictive value (92%), remaining significant after adjustment for MMR. Although MMR status had the strongest association with response, further work to determine the significance of ICP ≥ 10 and the novel optimal cutpoint algorithm is needed.

Indexed as

endometrial carcinomaimmune checkpoint inhibitorsimmunohistochemistryprogrammed death ligand 1receiver operating characteristic analyses

Identifiers

PMID36612250
PMCPMC9818816
OpenAlexW4313389175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.