MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1600230194 · doi:10.1002/cncr.29363

Phase 2 study of <scp>MK</scp>‐2206, an allosteric inhibitor of <scp>AKT</scp>, as second‐line therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer: A SWOG cooperative group trial (<scp>S</scp>1005)

2015· article· en· W1600230194 on OpenAlexaff
Ramesh K. Ramanathan, Shannon McDonough, Hagen F. Kennecke, Syma Iqbal, Joaquina Baranda, Tara Elisabeth Seery, Howard J. Lim, Aram F. Hezel, Gina M. Vaccaro, Charles D. Blanke

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineGastroenterologyInternal medicineRashAdverse effectNauseaVomitingClinical endpointAnemiaCancerDiarrheaSurgeryClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The AKT inhibitor MK-2206 at a dose of 60 mg every other day was evaluated in gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancers. METHODS: Patients who had progressed after first-line treatment were eligible. Pertinent eligibility criteria included adequate organ function, a fasting serum glucose level ≤ 150 mg/dL, and less than grade 2 malabsorption or chronic diarrhea. MK-2206 was given orally (60 evaluable patients required). The primary endpoint was overall survival, and a median survival of 6.5 months (power, 89%; significance level, 0.07) was considered encouraging for further investigation. RESULTS: Seventy patients were included in the final analyses. The median age was 59.8 years (range, 30.4-86.7 years); 70% were male, 89% were white, and 7% were Asian. There were 2 deaths possibly related to the study drug (cardiac arrest and respiratory failure). Grade 4 adverse events included hyperglycemia, anemia, and lung infection (1 each). Grade 3 adverse events occurred in < 5% of patients except for fatigue (6%). Other adverse events (all grades) included anemia (17%), anorexia (30%), diarrhea (26%), fatigue (50%), hyperglycemia (30%), nausea (40%), vomiting (22%), dry skin (19%), maculopapular rash (30%), and acneiform rash (13%). The response rate was 1%, the median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% confidence interval, 1.7-1.8 months), and the median overall survival was 5.1 months (95% confidence interval, 3.7-9.4 months) CONCLUSIONS: MK-2206 as second-line therapy was well tolerated by an unselected group of patients with gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancers, but it did not have sufficient activity (response rate, 1%; overall survival, 5.1 months) to warrant further testing in this population.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations89
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207