MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152419134 · doi:10.1200/jco.2005.08.091

Multicenter, Randomized Phase II Trial of Oral CI-1033 for Previously Treated Advanced Ovarian Cancer

2005· article· en· W2152419134 on OpenAlexaff
Susana M. Campos, Oday Hamid, Michael V. Seiden, Amit M. Oza, Marie Plante, Ronald K. Potkul, Peter F. Lenehan, Eric Kaldjian, Mary Varterasian, Cheryl Jordan, Claudie Charbonneau, Hal W. Hirte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de QuébecPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineOvarian cancerGastroenterologyAdverse effectToxicityPopulationNauseaCancerPhases of clinical researchOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate the antitumor activity and toxicity of two doses of CI-1033 in patients with platinum-refractory or recurrent ovarian cancer, and to determine baseline expression of epidermal growth factor receptor in tumor cells. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II, open-label clinical trial evaluated CI-1033 in patients with ovarian cancer who failed prior platinum-based therapy. Two oral doses of CI-1033 were evaluated--a 50-mg and a 200--mg oral dose administered daily for 21 days in a 28-day cycle. Patients were evaluated for tumor response and toxicity; in addition, archival baseline tumor samples were analyzed by immunohistochemistry for erbB1 to erbB4 status. RESULTS: One hundred five eligible patients were treated. Baseline demographic characteristics were balanced in this heavily pretreated patient population. The median number of prior chemotherapy regimens received was four. The most commonly encountered drug-related adverse events for both dose arms were gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea, stomatitis) toxicity, asthenia, and rash. No responses were observed. Stable disease was confirmed in 34% and 26% of patients in the 200-mg and 50-mg arms, respectively, and 1-year survival rates were 38.5% and 37.7%, respectively. Baseline erbB3 and erbB4 revealed the highest frequencies of expression, while erbB2 was the lowest. CONCLUSION: CI-1033 did not show activity in unscreened patients with advanced ovarian cancer. At 50 mg/d, CI-1033 had a more favorable adverse events profile than at 200 mg/d. erbB3 and erbB4 receptors showed the highest expression in tumor samples while erbB2 revealed the least. There appears to be no association between baseline erbB expression and disease stability.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.606
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Citations108
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207