Comparison of Gemcitabine Versus the Matrix Metalloproteinase Inhibitor BAY 12-9566 in Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreas: A Phase III Trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group
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: To compare the selective matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor BAY 12-9566 with the nucleoside analog gemcitabine in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma who had not previously received chemotherapy were randomly assigned to receive BAY 12-9566 800 mg orally bid continuously or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 administered intravenously on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, 36, and 43 for the first 8 weeks, and then days 1, 8, and 15 of each subsequent 28-day cycle. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were progression-free survival, tumor response, quality of life, and clinical benefit. The planned sample size of the study was 350 patients. Two formal interim analyses were planned. RESULTS: The study was closed to accrual after the second interim analysis on the basis of the recommendation of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Data Safety Monitoring Committee. There were 277 patients enrolled onto the study, 138 in the BAY 12-9566 arm and 139 in the gemcitabine arm. The rates of serious toxicity were low in both arms. The median survival for the BAY 12-9566 arm and the gemcitabine arm was 3.74 months and 6.59 months, respectively (P <.001; stratified log-rank test). The median progression-free survival for the BAY 12-9566 and gemcitabine arms was 1.68 and 3.5 months, respectively (P <.001). Quality-of-life analysis also favored gemcitabine. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine is significantly superior to BAY 12-9566 in advanced pancreatic cancer.
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 | 0.019 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it