MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1940434397 · doi:10.1007/s00280-015-2852-2

Phase II study of temozolomide and veliparib combination therapy for sorafenib-refractory advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

2015· article· en· W1940434397 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Gabrielson, Anteneh Tesfaye, John L. Marshall, Michael J. Pishvaian, Brandon G. Smaglo, Reena Jha, Karen Dorsch‐Vogel, Hongkun Wang, Aiwu Ruth He

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsGeorgetown Hospital
FundersLombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown UniversityAmerican Cancer Society
KeywordsMedicineSorafenibTolerabilityInternal medicineClinical endpointNauseaHepatocellular carcinomaTemozolomidePhases of clinical researchRegimenVeliparibGastroenterologySurgeryProgressive diseaseVomitingOncologyClinical trialAdverse effectChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine the antitumor efficacy and tolerability of combination temozolomide (TMZ) and veliparib (ABT-888) in patients with advanced, sorafenib-refractory hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: This single-arm phase II trial enrolled patients with pathologically confirmed, sorafenib-refractory HCC. All patients received 40 mg ABT-888 PO daily on days 1-7 and 150 mg/m(2) TMZ PO daily on days 1-5 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) at 2 months. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity profile. Tumor response was assessed every 2 cycles using RECIST criteria, and toxicities were assessed using CTCAE v4.03. RESULTS: We enrolled 16 patients in the first phase of the trial, but the study was discontinued due to a poor ORR; only four patients (25 %) had SD after 2 cycles. Twelve patients (75 %) were taken off study after 2 months of treatment; 10 of these had disease progression. Two patients (13 %) were taken off study due to severe toxicity, and one patient (6 %) died from non-treatment-related liver failure. One patient had SD for 16 months, receiving 11 cycles of therapy before being taken off study. The most common grade 3 treatment-related toxicities included vomiting (n = 2), thrombocytopenia (n = 2), nausea (n = 1), and anemia (n = 1). The median PFS was 1.9 months, and median OS was 13.1 months. CONCLUSION: The combination of TMZ and ABT-888 is well tolerated in patients with advanced HCC. However, the regimen failed to show survival benefit. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01205828.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations41
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Chemotherapy and PharmacologySame topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisFrench-language works237,207