ライフサイエンスコーパス: atezolizumab

1 pression, clinicians should use nivolumab or atezolizumab.

2 d, collected before and after treatment with atezolizumab.

3 s, of whom 119 received one or more doses of atezolizumab.

4 utcomes in urothelial carcinoma treated with atezolizumab.

5 after bevacizumab and after the addition of atezolizumab.

6 pression, had improved overall survival with atezolizumab.

7 expression ratio correlated with response to atezolizumab.

8 be independently predictive for response to atezolizumab.

9 lock design (block size of four), to receive atezolizumab 1200 mg or chemotherapy (physician's choice

10 signed (1:1) to intravenously receive either atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 wee

11 e voice or web system to receive intravenous atezolizumab 1200 mg or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) once every

12 Patients received treatment with intravenous atezolizumab (1200 mg, given every 3 weeks).

13 ent-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events with atezolizumab (90 [15%] of 609 patients) versus docetaxel

14 In this trial, we assessed treatment with atezolizumab, an engineered humanised immunoglobulin G1

15 142 patients received at least one dose of atezolizumab and 135 received docetaxel.

16 5 patients were randomly assigned to receive atezolizumab and 425 patients were assigned to receive d

17 This study assessed atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) as

18 e aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]) ve

19 ting that PD-L1 expression is predictive for atezolizumab benefit.

20 on of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) with atezolizumab can induce durable clinical benefit (DCB) i

21 pulation, overall survival was improved with atezolizumab compared with docetaxel (median overall sur

22 Atezolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile an

23 Patients were given 1200 mg intravenous atezolizumab every 21 days until progression.

24 us (HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.54-0.98]; n=112 in the atezolizumab group and n=110 in the docetaxel group) or

25 differ significantly between patients in the atezolizumab group and those in the chemotherapy group (

26 le patients had an objective response in the atezolizumab group compared with 25 (22%) of 116 patient

27 11 (8%) patients in the atezolizumab group discontinued because of adverse event

28 on of response was numerically longer in the atezolizumab group than in the chemotherapy group (media

29 16 (11%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus 52 (39%) patients in the docet

30 adverse events, and one (<1%) patient in the atezolizumab group versus three (2%) patients in the doc

31 144 patients were randomly allocated to the atezolizumab group, and 143 to the docetaxel group.

32 tion-to-treat population, patients receiving atezolizumab had fewer grade 3-4 treatment-related adver

33 se single-agent nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab; if tumor has negative or unknown PD-L1 exp

34 potentiate PD-L1 checkpoint inhibition with atezolizumab in mRCC.

35 el did not demonstrate improved survival for atezolizumab in patients overall, although a trend towar

36 guided ongoing studies and combinations with atezolizumab in RCC.

37 erall survival was significantly longer with atezolizumab in the ITT and PD-L1-expression populations

38 onses in line with previous phase 2 data for atezolizumab in this setting.

39 Atezolizumab is a humanised antiprogrammed death-ligand

40 i-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab is clinically active against cancer, includ

41 TC0 and IC0) also had improved survival with atezolizumab (median overall survival 12.6 months vs 8.9

42 etermine the safety and clinical activity of atezolizumab (MPDL3280A), a humanized programmed death-l

43 /2/3 or IC1/2/3 population was improved with atezolizumab (n=241) compared with docetaxel (n=222; med

44 igned 931 patients from 198 sites to receive atezolizumab (n=467) or chemotherapy (n=464).

45 ue were analyzed for potential biomarkers of atezolizumab response.

46 overall response rate of 10%, treatment with atezolizumab resulted in a significantly improved RECIST

47 Atezolizumab showed durable activity and good tolerabili

48 INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab showed encouraging durable response rates,

49 Atezolizumab showed encouraging durable response rates,

50 Atezolizumab significantly improved survival compared wi

51 phase II trial comparing the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab to docetaxel did not demonstrate improved s

52 Of these patients, 310 received atezolizumab treatment (five enrolled patients later did

53 rt results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevan

54 rt results of a PD-L1-targeted therapy, with atezolizumab treatment resulting in a clinically relevan

55 lation was 12.6 months (95% CI 9.7-16.4) for atezolizumab versus 9.7 months (8.6-12.0) for docetaxel

56 We assessed efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus docetaxel in previously treated NSCL

57 ival was 15.7 months [95% CI 12.6-18.0] with atezolizumab vs 10.3 months [8.8-12.0] with docetaxel; H

58 However, the safety profile for atezolizumab was favourable compared with chemotherapy,

59 INTERPRETATION: Atezolizumab was not associated with significantly longe

60 Atezolizumab was well tolerated, with a safety profile d

61 rticipants who received one or more doses of atezolizumab were included in the primary and safety ana