MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070826508 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs-4116

Safety of bevacizumab (BV) plus docetaxel (D) in patients (pts) with locally recurrent (LR) or metastatic breast cancer (mBC) who developed brain metastases during the AVADO phase III study.

2009· article· en· W2070826508 on OpenAlexaff
LY Dirix, Gilles Romieu, Louise Provencher, David Robert Grimes, Luciano de Souza Viana, Alexander Paterson, L. Mauriac, A. Kirsch, Sònia Pernas, D.W. Miles

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Saint-Sacrement
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetastatic breast cancerBevacizumabInternal medicineClinical endpointHazard ratioDocetaxelPopulationNeutropeniaTaxanePlaceboBreast cancerOncologyCancerSurgeryChemotherapyClinical trialConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract #4116 Background: BV (Avastin®) is a monoclonal antibody specific to VEGF. The randomised, double-blind AVADO study has demonstrated that two different BV doses combined with D significantly improved progression-free survival in pts with LR or mBC compared with D + placebo (PL); unstratified hazard ratio (HR) up to 0.72, stratified HR up to 0.61 censored for non-protocol therapy. BV combined with D did not result in increased risk of GI perforations, thromboembolic or bleeding events. Patients with CNS metastases are currently excluded from clinical trials with BV due to a potential risk of haemorrhage. This retrospective analysis investigated the adverse events (AEs) reported in pts who developed brain metastases while participating in the AVADO trial.
 Methods: The AVADO study compared D 100mg/m2 plus PL with D plus BV at either 7.5 or 15mg/kg in 736 pts with HER2-negative inoperable LR or mBC; no chemotherapy 6 months prior to randomisation (≥12 months if taxane-based); ECOG PS 0–1; adequate LVEF, and no CNS metastases at study entry. D was administered q3w for up to 9 cycles. BV/PL was administered q3w until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
 Results: Of the 730 pts in the safety population, a total of 24 pts developed brain metastases at some point during the AVADO trial. There was no difference in number of pts who developed brain metastases between trial arms. The mean time to development of brain metastases was 172 days with PL, 197 days with BV 7.5mg/kg and 242 days with BV 15mg/kg. One patient receiving BV 15mg/kg was diagnosed with brain metastases on Day 1 and excluded from the study. No CNS bleeding AEs were reported for pts with brain metastases and other grade 3–5 AEs in these pts occurred at a similar frequency in all trial arms.
 
 Conclusions: In concordance with the overall toxicity assessment, treatment with BV did not appear to be associated with CNS haemorrhage in pts with brain metastases. Frequency of grade 3–5 AEs was not increased in pts with brain metastases treated with BV compared with those treated with PL. Analysis of a larger dataset may provide further information on the safety of BV therapy in pts with brain metastases. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 4116.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.368 · 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.

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

Citations49
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207