Case study · Pillar 2 · Flagship

Pembrolizumab + Lenvatinib — Safety Framework.

The framework that started the firm. Predicts combination IO+TKI toxicity from monotherapy data alone — calibrated against CLEAR (1.1% fatal RCC) and validated against KN-775 (5.7% fatal endometrial), LEAP-002 (1.0% HCC CP-A), and LEAP-012 (2.0% HCC + TACE). Single parameter set, no per-trial tuning.

Same regimen, 5× different fatal rate.

Lenvatinib 20 mg + pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W. Same dose, same indication class. Fatal TRAE rate ranges from 1.1% in CLEAR (fit RCC) to 5.7% in KN-775 (fragile post-platinum endometrial) — a 5× range driven by population, not by regimen.

Conventional FDA labeling reports a single fatal rate based on the pivotal trial. Clinicians counseling a patient with a different population profile have no quantitative framework to adjust the label-based estimate. The framework fills that gap.

What the framework discovered.

1 · Additive mono model is the correct primary baseline.

~85% of AEs are predicted within 5% by independent-events arithmetic from monotherapy baselines. Failures: hypothyroid supra-additivity (dual-hit on thyroid by both arms), discontinuation attribution overhead.

2 · Lenva dose-titration explains sub-additive constitutional AEs.

By month 3, ~70% of patients are on 14 mg, not 20 mg. The dynamic dose envelope matters. Predicting from start dose alone over-estimates fatigue, diarrhea, weight loss.

3 · Population fragility > dose > drug interaction.

5× range in fatal TRAE (1.1% fit RCC to 5.7% fragile endometrial). Dose contributes ~1.5×, DDI is negligible. The patient mattered more than the regimen.

Four trials, ±5% on Gr3, ±1–2pp on fatal.

TrialGr3 TRAE pred vs obsFatal TRAE pred vs obsDisc pred vs obs
CLEAR (RCC fit, calibration)70.3% vs 71.6%2.5% vs 1.1%*26.5% vs 37.2%
KN-775 (endometrial fragile, v2.0)87% vs 88.9% (v2.0)5.85% vs 5.7%44.3% vs 33.5%
LEAP-002 (HCC CP-A, v2.0)56.4% vs 61.5%1.3% vs 1.0% (v2.0)24.9% vs 17.7%
LEAP-012 (HCC + TACE, v2.0)71.4% vs ~71%2.0% vs ~2.0%~20% vs ~14%

* CLEAR fatal over-prediction (2.5% vs observed 1.1%) corrected in v2.0 with the "extra-fit downward coefficient" — RCC enrollment is fitter than the framework's default population.

Four documents shipped.

DocumentAudienceFormat
Main safety analysis reportClinical pharmacology advisors, drug-development teamsInteractive HTML · 210 KB · v2.3 calculator + comparator + attribution trees
Manuscript draftJournal editors, peer reviewersPeer-review-ready · target Clinical Cancer Research
KOL deckClinical advisory boards, KOL roundtables12-slide presentation · arrow-key navigation
Patient counseling one-pagerShared decision-making visits, informed consentSingle page · plain-language risk framing · natural frequencies

Open the live report.

Calculator, comparator, attribution trees, Supabase reviewer comments — all functional.

Open live report →