MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of pain at baseline and pain progression to predict overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with docetaxel pretreated metastatic castration-refractory prostate cancer (CRPC): Results from the SPARC trial

2009· article· en· W1814462863 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Oliver Sartor, Daniel P. Petrylak, C. Sternberg, Fred Witjes, Susan Halabi, William Berry, Michael E. Petrone, T. J. McKearn, Mojtaba Noursalehi, Monika George

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomizationPlaceboDocetaxelClinical endpointProstate cancerAnalgesicInternal medicinePrednisoneRandomized controlled trialChemotherapyCancerAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5148 Background: First-line chemotherapy trials have reported that pain predicts OS in CRPC. We report relationships between OS and baseline pain –a major component of CRPC patient reported outcomes (PRO) –and pain at progression, for docetaxel pre-treated patients in a second-line chemotherapy trial in CRPC. Methods: Docetaxel pre-treated pts (N = 488) were analyzed from the multi-national, randomized, double-blind SPARC trial, comparing second-line satraplatin + prednisone vs placebo + prednisone in 950 metastatic CRPC pts. Daily pain intensity and narcotic analgesic use were recorded as a PRO from one week prior to randomization until end-of-study. Pain was measured by the 6-point Present Pain Intensity (PPI) component of the McGill-Melzack Pain Questionnaire. After randomization, weekly PPI scores were calculated as the mean of the daily PPI scores (using ≥3 daily measurements/week). Baseline pain was the mean of ≥5 daily PPI scores recorded during 7 days preceding randomization. An independent blinded review committee (IRC) determined pain progression (defined as an increase in weekly PPI score ≥1 point from baseline or ≥2 points from nadir, or a >25% increase from baseline in weekly average analgesic score for ≥2 consecutive weeks). To examine the effects of pain on OS, pts were categorized as “no pain” (PPI ≤1) or pain (PPI ≥2) by baseline assessment; and, as either pain progressors or pain non-progressors. Results: Shortened OS was observed in pts with baseline pain; median survival of 178 pts with pain was 44 weeks vs 72 weeks for 287 pts without pain (Strat. Log-rank p < 0.0001, Strat. HR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.48–0.74). IRC found disease progression in 414 (84.4%) of the docetaxel pre-treated pts with 196 of these pts showing pain progression. Pain progression was strongly linked to OS with 196 pain progressors having median OS of 47 weeks compared to 71 weeks for 292 pain non-progressors (Strat. Log-Rank p = 0.0022; Strat. HR 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57–0.87). Conclusions: Both pain at baseline and pain at progression are important prognostic indicators of OS in metastatic CRPC pts failing first-line docetaxel. [Table: see text]

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207