MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract LB-67: REGARD: A phase III, randomized, double-blind trial of ramucirumab and best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo and BSC in the treatment of metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma following disease progression on first-line p

2013· article· en· W2031191883 on OpenAlexaff
Charles S. Fuchs, Jiří Tomášek, Y. Choi, Filip Dumitru, Rodolfo Passalacqua, Chancal Goswami, Howard Safran, Lucas Vieira dos Santos, Giuseppe Aprile, David Ferry, Bohuslav Melichar, Moustapha Tehfe, Э. Э. Топузов, Josep Tabernero, John Zalcberg, Ian Chau, Minori Koshiji, Yanzhi Hsu, Jonathan D. Schwartz, Jaffer A. Ajani

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHôpital Notre-Dame
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRamucirumabMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioClinical endpointPlaceboGastroenterologyCancerProgression-free survivalBevacizumabOncologyRandomized controlled trialChemotherapyConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: VEGF and VEGF receptor-2 mediated signaling and angiogenesis may contribute to gastric cancer pathogenesis. Ramucirumab (RAM; IMC-1121B) is a fully human IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting VEGFR-2. We conducted a placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase III international trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RAM in pts with metastatic gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma progressing on 1st-line platinum- and/or fluoropyrimidine containing combination therapy. Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive RAM (8 mg/kg IV) or placebo (PL) every 2 weeks (wks) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Pts had disease progression within 4 months (m) after 1st-line therapy for metastatic disease or within 6 m after adjuvant therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), 12-wk PFS rate, overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Results: From 10/09 to 01/12, 355 pts were randomized (RAM: 238; PL: 117). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms. RAM significantly reduced all-cause mortality by 22% when compared to PL (Hazard Ratio [HR] for OS = 0.776; 95% CI, 0.603-0.998; p = 0.0473). Median OS was 5.2 m for RAM and 3.8 m for PL. The OS benefit for RAM appeared consistent across subgroups and after adjustment for other prognostic factors (multivariate HR = 0.774; 95% CI, 0.605-0.991). The HR for PFS was 0.483 (95% CI, 0.376-0.620; p < 0.0001). Median PFS was 2.1 m for RAM and 1.3 m for PL. 12-wk PFS was 40% for RAM and 16% for PL. ORR was 3.4% for RAM and 2.6% for PL. Disease control rate was 49% for RAM and 23% for PL (p < 0.0001). Use of anti-cancer therapy post-study: 32% RAM; 39% PL. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were: hypertension (7.6% RAM; 2.6% PL), fatigue (6.4% RAM; 9.6% PL), anemia (6.4% RAM; 7.8% PL), abdominal pain (5.9% RAM; 2.6% PL), ascites (4.2% RAM; 4.3% PL), decreased appetite (3.4% RAM; 3.5% PL), bleeding (3.4% RAM; 2.6% PL), and hyponatremia (3.4% RAM; 0.9% PL). Conclusions: Ramucirumab significantly prolonged survival in pts with advanced gastric or GE junction adenocarcinoma following progression on first-line therapy with an acceptable safety profile. These results validate VEGFR-2 signaling as a therapeutic target in gastric cancer. Clinical trial: NCT00917384 Citation Format: Charles S. Fuchs, Jiri Tomasek, Jae Yong Cho, Dumitru Filip, Rodolfo Passalacqua, Chancal Goswami, Howard Safran, Lucas Vieira Dos Santos, Giuseppe Aprile, David Ferry, Bohuslav Melichar, Moustapha Tehfe, Eldar Topuzov, Josep Tabernero, John Raymond Zalcberg, Ian Chau, Minori Koshiji, Yanzhi Hsu, Jonathan Schwartz, Jaffer Ajani. REGARD: A phase III, randomized, double-blind trial of ramucirumab and best supportive care (BSC) versus placebo and BSC in the treatment of metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma following disease progression on first-line p [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-67. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-LB-67

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207