Phase II Clinical Trial of Ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an Epothilone B Analog, As First-Line Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With Anthracycline Chemotherapy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is a need for new agents to treat metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in patients for whom anthracycline therapy has failed or is contraindicated. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel antineoplastic, the epothilone B analog ixabepilone, in patients with MBC previously treated with an adjuvant anthracycline. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were age >or= 18 years and had received a prior anthracycline-based regimen as adjuvant treatment. Ixabepilone as first-line metastatic chemotherapy was administered as a 40 mg/m(2) intravenous infusion during 3 hours every 3 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary efficacy end points included duration of response, time to response, time to progression, and survival. RESULTS: All 65 patients were assessable for response. Their median age was 52 years (range, 33 to 80 years). ORR was 41.5% (95% CI, 29.4% to 54.4%), median duration of response was 8.2 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 10.2 months), and median time to response was 6 weeks (range, 5 to 17 weeks). Median survival was 22.0 months (95% CI, 15.6 to 27.0 months). Treatment-related adverse events were manageable and mostly grades 1/2: the most common of these (other than alopecia) was mild to moderate neuropathy, which was primarily sensory and mostly reversible in nature. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone is efficacious and has a predictable and manageable safety profile in women with MBC previously treated with an adjuvant anthracycline.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it