Sorafenib for the treatment of metastatic renal cancer (MRC) in the real world: The Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH) experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
15568 Background: Sorafenib, an oral multi-kinase inhibitor, prolonged progression free survival (PFS) of MRC patients (pts) in second line when compared to placebo in a phase III trial (Escudier at al ECCO 2005). Grade 3/4 adverse events (AE) were reported in 12% of pts. Here we present sorafenib’s efficacy and safety in a less selected cohort of pts enrolled in the Bayer Expanded Access Program at PMH. Methods: Pts with MRC received Sorafenib 400 mg bid continuously until disease progression (PD) and/or clinical deterioration..Tumor response was measured by RECIST criteria. AE were graded by NCI common toxicity criteria. Summary statistics and logistic regression were used to describe the results. Results: From Nov 2005 to Aug 2006, 58 pts were enrolled: median age was 59 years (range 14–86), 47 (81%) were male, 48 (83%) had clear cell histology and 46 (79%) received Sorafenib in first line. None received prior kinase-inhibitors. Using the Motzer Prognostic Index, 29 pts (50%) were low risk, 21 (36%) intermediate and 8 (14%) poor risk. Grade 3/4 AE occurred in 37 pts (64%, 95% CI 50–76%): 15 (26%) pts had skin rash, 10 (17%) hand-foot syndrome, 4 (7%) hypertension, 4 (7%) fatigue, and 4 (7%) diarrhea. Thirty-six (62%) pts required dose reductions and/or treatment interruptions, most due to skin reactions and hand-foot syndrome. Median follow-up was 9 months (IQR range 2–11), the median PFS was 7.5 months (IQR range 5.4–11.3), and the best responses among 56 evaluable pts were: 10 (17%) confirmed partial responses (median duration: 6 months, range 4–11), 14 (24%) stable diseases for = 6 months and 10 (18%) early progression. Pts with bony mets progressed earlier than pts without bony mets. Abnormal creatinine clearance, age, performance status, line of treatment and presence of significant comorbid conditions were not associated with grade 3/4 AE in univariate analysis. Conclusions: Sorafenib is effective in a ”real world”, less selected patient population with MRC but leads to more toxicity than described previously. [Table: see text]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".