Phase 2 trial of CPX-351, a fixed 5:1 molar ratio of cytarabine/daunorubicin, vs cytarabine/daunorubicin in older adults with untreated AML
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CPX-351 is a liposomal formulation of cytarabine:daunorubicin designed to deliver synergistic drug ratios to leukemia cells. In this phase 2 study, newly diagnosed older acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients were randomized 2:1 to first-line CPX-351 or 7+3 treatment. The goal was to determine efficacy and identify patient subgroups that may benefit from CPX-351 treatment. Response rate (complete remission + incomplete remission) was the primary end point, with event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) as secondary end points. The 126 patients entered were balanced for disease and patient-specific risk factors. Overall, CPX-351 produced higher response rates (66.7% vs 51.2%, P = .07), meeting predefined criteria for success (P < .1). Differences in EFS and OS were not statistically significant. A planned analysis of the secondary AML subgroup demonstrated an improved response rate (57.6% vs 31.6%, P = .06), and prolongation of EFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59, P = .08) and OS (HR = 0.46, P = .01). Recovery from cytopenias was slower after CPX-351 (median days to absolute neutrophil count ≥1000: 36 vs 32; platelets >100 000: 37 vs 28) with more grade 3-4 infections but without increase in infection-related deaths (3.5% vs 7.3%) or 60-day mortality (4.7% vs 14.6%), indicating acceptable safety. These results suggest a clinical benefit with CPX-351, particularly among patients with secondary AML, and provide the rationale for a phase 3 trial currently underway in newly diagnosed secondary AML patients. This study is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00788892.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".