MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract OT1-1-07: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) suppression with the addition of lapatinib to trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (LTP112515)

2012· article· en· W2081555496 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nong Lin, MA Danso, AK David, Joseph J. Muscato, Daniel Rayson, WA Houck, Christopher Ellis, Michelle DeSilvio, Amanda Garofalo, Yasir M. Nagarwala, EP Winer

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLapatinibMedicineTrastuzumabMetastatic breast cancerTolerabilityInternal medicineDiscontinuationOncologyBreast cancerChemotherapyAdverse effectCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The combination of lapatinib (L) with trastuzumab (T) results in enhanced antitumor activity in preclinical models of HER2-positive breast cancer (BC), due to the complementary mechanisms of action of the two agents. In patients with prior T-treated HER2-positive metastatic BC (MBC), treatment with T plus L was associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with L alone. The combination also had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. In patients with stage II/III BC, preoperative treatment with the combination plus paclitaxel (P) resulted in significantly higher pathologic complete response rates compared with P combined with either agent alone. This evidence supports the concept of dual HER2 blockade as a treatment strategy for HER2-positive MBC. Current common clinical practice for most patients experiencing clinical benefit from first-line treatment with T plus chemotherapy is to continue T as maintenance therapy after completion of the recommended number of chemotherapy cycles. The present study is designed to evaluate whether the addition of L improves PFS among women with HER2-positive MBC receiving T as maintenance therapy. Methods: In this open-label, Phase III study, 280 patients will be stratified by line of treatment (first/second) and hormone receptor status (positive/negative), then randomized 1:1 to receive maintenance treatment with either L (1000 mg qd, continuously) in combination with T (6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks [q3w]), or T (6 mg/kg q3w) alone. Patients will receive study treatment until disease progression, death, discontinuation due to adverse events, or patient withdrawal. The primary endpoint is PFS; secondary endpoints are; OS, clinical benefit rate, and safety. Key eligibility criteria include females, age ≥18 years with HER2-positive MBC who have completed 12 to 24 weeks of first- or second-line treatment with T plus chemotherapy with an objective response or stable disease at time of chemotherapy discontinuation. Patients with stable brain metastases are eligible if entering the study on second-line treatment. Efficacy endpoints will be analyzed in the intent-to-treat population. A total of 193 PFS events is required to detect a 50% increase in median PFS (hazard ratio=0.667) from 18 weeks (T alone) to 27 weeks (L plus T). The hypothesis will be tested using a 1-sided test with 80% power and a type I error of 0.025. One interim analysis is planned for futility when approximately 97 PFS events (50% of the required events) have been observed. Safety endpoints will be analyzed in all randomized patients who receive ≥1 dose of study medication. The trial is currently open for accrual in the United States and Canada. ClinicalTrials.gov - NCT00968968 Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr OT1-1-07.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207