MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024548912 · doi:10.1002/cncr.27674

Phase 3, randomized, placebo‐controlled study of zibotentan (ZD4054) in patients with castration‐resistant prostate cancer metastatic to bone

2012· article· en· W2024548912 on OpenAlexaff
Joel B. Nelson, Karim Fizazi, Kurt Miller, Celestia S. Higano, Judd W. Moul, Hideyuki Akaza, Thomas Morris, Stuart McIntosh, Kristine Pemberton, Martin Gleave

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerPlaceboClinical endpointHazard ratioPeripheral edemaInternal medicineAdverse effectBone painRandomized controlled trialCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse EventsPopulationCancerSurgeryConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Endothelin-1 and the endothelin A (ET(A) ) receptor have been implicated in prostate cancer progression in bone. This study aimed to determine whether the specific ET(A) receptor antagonist, zibotentan, prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases who were pain-free or mildly symptomatic for pain. METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to zibotentan 10 mg/day or placebo, plus standard prostate cancer treatment. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included times to pain progression, chemotherapy use, new bone metastases, and safety. Efficacy endpoints were analyzed using a log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 594 patients were randomized (zibotentan, n = 299; placebo, n = 295). Median OS was 24.5 months in zibotentan-treated patients versus 22.5 months for placebo, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95.2% confidence interval, 0.69-1.10; P = .240). No statistically significant differences were observed for any secondary efficacy endpoints. Peripheral edema (44%) and headache (31%) were the most commonly reported adverse events in the zibotentan group. Cardiac failure events were higher in the zibotentan group than placebo (any grade, 5.7% and 1.7%; Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade ≥3, 3.0% and 1.0%, respectively); these were manageable and reversible. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, treatment with zibotentan 10 mg/day did not lead to a statistically significant improvement in OS in this patient population. Zibotentan had an acceptable safety profile.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 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

Citations112
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207