MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168841302 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-06-0462

Exon 19 Deletion Mutations of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Are Associated with Prolonged Survival in Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients Treated with Gefitinib or Erlotinib

2006· article· en· W2168841302 on OpenAlexaff
David M. Jackman, Beow Y. Yeap, Lecia V. Sequist, Neal I. Lindeman, Alison J. Holmes, Victoria A. Joshi, Daphne W. Bell, Mark S. Huberman, Balázs Halmos, Michael S. Rabin, Daniel A. Haber, Thomas J. Lynch, Matthew Meyerson, Bruce E. Johnson, Pasi A. Jänne

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsImmunovaccine (Canada)
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsGefitinibErlotinibEpidermal growth factor receptorLung cancerMedicineExonErlotinib HydrochlorideInternal medicineOncologyMutationPoint mutationCancer researchCancerBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Somatic mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have been detected in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and are associated with sensitivity to treatment with gefitinib or erlotinib. Our study explored the relationship between the two most common types of somatic EGFR mutations, exon 19 deletions and the L858R point mutation, and outcomes of patients following treatment with gefitinib or erlotinib. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tumor specimens obtained before treatment with gefitinib or erlotinib were analyzed for EGFR mutations. Patients with exon 19 deletion or L858R mutations were identified. The response rate, time to progression, and overall survival were determined for the two groups. RESULTS: We identified 36 patients with NSCLC and an EGFR mutation who were treated with gefitinib or erlotinib. Patients with an exon 19 deletion had a significantly longer overall survival compared with patients with an L858R mutation (38 versus 17 months; P = 0.04). There were also trends toward higher response rate (73% versus 50%) and improved time to progression (24 versus 10 months) for the patients with an exon 19 deletion, although these were not independently significant in a multivariate analysis. A difference in response rate for patients treated with gefitinib compared with erlotinib was also noted [18 of 23 (78%) versus 3 of 9 (33%); P = 0.04]. No obvious difference in time to progression or overall survival was noted between gefitinib- and erlotinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with NSCLC and EGFR exon 19 deletions have a longer survival following treatment with gefitinib or erlotinib compared with those with the L858R mutation. Pooling of greater numbers of patients and completion of prospective trials are needed to further define the predictive and prognostic roles of different EGFR mutations with respect to treatment with gefitinib, erlotinib, and other EGFR inhibitors.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations584
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207