The relationship between rash, tumour KRAS mutation status and clinical and quality of life outcomes in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab in the NCIC CTG/AGITG CO.17
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The NCIC CTG/AGITG CO.17 trial demonstrated that cetuximab monotherapy improved overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS) in patients previously treated for advanced colorectal cancer. A strong relationship was observed between benefit from cetuximab and development of rash. In this analysis, the association of rash and benefit from cetuximab is explored and presented by KRAS mutation status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Rash was graded by NCI CTC 2.0 criteria. Landmark analysis was performed by excluding patients who died or dropped out within 28 days and then grouping by worst grade of rash experienced by day 28. Multivariate Cox models were conducted separately for patients with KRAS wild-type (WT) tumours and KRAS mutated (MUT) tumours. CO.17 primary outcome was OS. RESULTS: Development of grade 2 + rash on cetuximab was associated with a trend towards increased OS (HR 0.61 with 95% CI 0.36-1.02 and p = 0.06) and PFS (HR 0.68 with 95% CI 0.45-1.03 and p = 0.07) as compared to grade 0/1 rash in patients with WT tumours. In patients with WT tumours on cetuximab both grade 0/1 and grade 2 + rash were associated with increased PFS (HR 0.57 95% CI 0.38-0.86; p = 0.008; and HR 0.32 95% CI 0.21-0.49; p < 0.0001) respectively, in comparison with best supportive care (BSC). Only development of grade 2 + rash on cetuximab was associated with increased OS (HR 0.52 with 95% CI 0.34-0.80 and p = 0.003) in comparison with BSC. No significant difference was found in OS or PFS among patients on cetuximab with MUT tumours with either rash grade as compared to BSC. No consistent trend was observed for the association of severity of rash and quality of life (QoL). CONCLUSION: As all patients with WT tumours benefitted to some extent from cetuximab regardless of the grade of rash, grade of rash was not a useful predictive marker.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".