Evaluation of Self-Reported Progression and Correlation of Imatinib Dose to Survival in Patients with Metastatic Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: An Open Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Self-reported progression was evaluated as a predictor of survival in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). METHODS: This is a follow-up of an open cohort study of Life Raft Group (LRG) members with a diagnosis of KIT-positive metastatic GIST receiving imatinib from May 2000-December 2007 reporting their subjective response to therapy by completion of an internet-based questionnaire. Subjects received >or= 1 year of imatinib and reported an initial positive response. Members reporting stable disease or progression were excluded. Self-reported progression-free survival (srPFS) was compared with overall survival (OS) and analyzed by starting and last reported dose. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-nine subjects reported a mean starting dose of 527.8+/-177.9 mg/d at a mean age of 53.8+/-11.6 years at initial diagnosis. Of those reporting progression, 66% died versus 11% of those not reporting progression (P < 0.0001). When analyzed by last reported dose, a median srPFS benefit of 27.3 months was observed for the >400 mg/d group (P = 0.0017). Sixty-two percent of subjects who initiated therapy at >400 mg/d reported a dose reduction. When analyzed by last reported dose, a significant benefit in OS (P = 0.0229) and srPFS (P = 0.0069) was observed for subjects taking 600 over 400 mg/d. CONCLUSIONS: srPFS strongly correlated with OS. Significant advantages were observed when last reported dose was considered, as was higher daily dose. These observations suggest that careful escalation to intermediate daily doses should be investigated further for its potential to reduce the incidence and severity of adverse events, but also as a strategy against developing secondary resistance to imatinib.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".