2023 European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Congress, held in Madrid, Spain and online on October 20-24, 2023, provided a comprehensive update on the latest breakthroughs in cancer research.The program focused on recent advances in basic science, translational research, and clinical study results, as well as prevention, screening, and early diagnosis, and aimed to help participants understand and optimize the clinical implementation of these advancements.This year's congress included over 2500 abstracts, with more than 33 000 participants from 155 countries.Following the congress on November 1, the Canadian Urological Association (CUA) held an online webinar, where Canadian experts reviewed the latest evidence in urologic cancers.This report highlights the most relevant and cutting-edge advances in prostate, kidney, and bladder cancers.The entire webinar can be viewed on UROpedia Canada, and meeting abstracts can be found on ESMO oncologyPRO. PROSTATE CANCERDr. Kim Chi presented novel and potentially impactful findings in prostate cancer.The final analysis of the MAGNITUDE trial, a phase 3, randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled study, evaluated the combination of niraparib (NIRA), a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi), with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations.1 mCRPC patients with HRR gene alterations, BRCA1 and BRCA2 in particular, have poor outcomes compared to patients without these gene alterations.At primary analysis, MAGNITUDE demonstrated significant improvement in radiographic progressionfree survival (rPFS) with NIRA + AAP compared with placebo + AAP in patients with BRCA-mutated mCRPC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.53, p=0.001).The final, pre-planned, event-driven overall survival (OS) analysis was conducted after a median followup of 35.9 months, with a focus on patients with BRCA-mutated mCRPC.The median treatment duration was 20.5 months for the NIRA + AAP arm and 14.4 months for the placebo + AAP arm.Final OS analysis demonstrated no significant difference, with a median survival of 30 months for those on NIRA compared to 28.6 months for those on placebo (HR 0.788).A pre-planned multivariate analysis adjusting for baseline imbalances demonstrated an OS benefit favoring NIRA + AAP (HR 0.663, p=0.0237), this despite 70% of NIRA vs. 86% of placebo patients receiving subsequent life-prolonging therapy, including over 40% of placebo patients receiving a subsequent PARPi or cisplatin-based chemotherapy.Other endpoints, such as time to symptomatic progression and time to cytotoxic chemotherapy, were also in favor of NIRA.Adverse events (AEs) were as expected, with greater AEs associated with NIRA.This analysis supports the positive benefit-risk profile of first-line NIRA with AAP as a new standard of care for patients with BRCA-mutated mCRPC.This further demonstrates the benefit of earlier use of PARPi with androgen receptor pathway inhibition (ARPI) as first-line therapy for mCRPC in patients with BRCA1/2 mutations in line with the PROpel 2 and TALAPRO-2 3 studies.These studies emphasize the need for tumor and germline testing to identify HHR alterations for patients with metastatic prostate cancer.A health-related quality-of-life (QoL) analysis was performed in patients participating in the EMBARK study.4 In this study, patients with non-metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (nmHSPC) with
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,372 | 0,252 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».