MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase IV study of first-line bevacizumab plus irinotecan and infusional 5-FU/LV in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: AVIRI

2007· article· en· W2255593359 on OpenAlexaff
Alberto Sobrero, Scott Young, Margaret Balcewicz, S. Chiarra, R.P. Carrion, Paul N. Mainwaring, J. Gapski, Stephen Clarke, Bernd Langer, Stephen P. Ackland

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Development Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIrinotecanBevacizumabFOLFIRIRegimenColorectal cancerInternal medicineOncologyPhases of clinical researchFluorouracilSurgeryChemotherapyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4068 Background: Bevacizumab (BEV) is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits tumour angiogenesis by targeting VEGF. In a phase III trial (AVF2107g), BEV significantly improved overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) when combined with first-line irinotecan plus bolus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) (IFL) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). A multicentre, open-label trial is being conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line BEV in combination with irinotecan and infusional 5-FU (FOLFIRI), a widely used first-line chemotherapy (CT) regimen. Methods: Patients had to have: mCRC; no surgery within 28 days; no prior CT for metastatic disease; ECOG PS 0/1, adequate organ function; no CNS metastases. CT consisted of a minimum of six cycles of irinotecan plus infusional 5-FU/LV according to the classical FOLFIRI regimen; variations like the simplified FOLFIRI and the weekly regimen were also allowed. BEV 5mg/kg was given on day 1 with CT and then every 2 weeks until disease progression. Tumour assessments were performed every 3 months during the first 12 months and every 4 months thereafter. Safety was assessed at the time of CT administration and every 4 weeks thereafter. The primary objective was PFS; secondary objectives included safety, overall response rate, time to response, duration of response and OS. Results: A total of 209 patients were enrolled at 31 centres worldwide, between April and November 2005. An interim analysis showed that the safety profile of BEV plus FOLFIRI appeared to be similar to that reported for Avastin plus IFL. The 44% overall response rate and 90% disease control rate are at least equivalent to that reported in comparable trials. Additionally, the 6 months PFS estimate of 82% was superior to that reported in AVF2107. Mature PFS data will be presented. Conclusions: AVIRI is the largest clinical trial, to date, to report data for BEV in combination with FOLFIRI in first-line patients with mCRC. The safety profile appears consistent with that observed in other BEV trials in mCRC, while the preliminary efficacy data suggest that this regimen is as active as the bolus regimen. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207