MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Evaluation of soluble KIT (sKIT) as a potential surrogate marker for TTP in sunitinib malate (SU)-treated patients (pts) with advanced GIST

2007· article· en· W2266655876 on OpenAlexaff
Martin E. Blackstein, Xuan Huang, George D. Demetri, Paolo G. Casali, Christopher R. Garrett, Patrick Schöffski, Manisha H. Shah, Jaap Verweij, Charles M. Baum, S. E. DePrimo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurrogate endpointClinical endpointGiSTPlaceboInternal medicineSunitinib malateGastroenterologyBristol-MyersClinical trialOncologySunitinibSurgeryPharmacologyCancerStromal cellPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10007 Background: SU is an oral, multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor of KIT, PDGFRs, VEGFRs, RET and FLT3, approved multinationally for the treatment of imatinib (IM)-resistant/-intolerant GIST. Preliminary analysis in a SU phase I/II GIST study suggested that a decline in plasma sKIT levels may correlate with measures of clinical benefit. We evaluated the potential of sKIT as a surrogate marker for TTP using samples obtained in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study of SU in pts with IM-resistant/-intolerant GIST, clinical results of which have been reported previously. Methods: 312 pts were randomized (2:1) to receive SU 50 mg (n=207) or placebo (n=105) daily in 6-wk cycles (4 wks on treatment, 2 wks off), respectively. The primary endpoint was TTP as per RECIST. Levels of sKIT in plasma samples were measured in cycle 1 on days 1, 14 and 28 and in cycles 2 and 3 on days 1 and 28 using a performance-validated ELISA. Prentice Criterion, Cox models and the Proportion of Treatment Effect (PTE) were used to analyze the results (PTE of 1 = ideal surrogate). Results: Numbers of pts with matched pairs of baseline and on-study plasma samples varied from 228 pts at cycle 1, day 14 to 106 pts at the end of cycle 3. After 4 wks of treatment (cycle 1, day 28), plasma sKIT levels began to exhibit a significant decrease (P<0.0001) in response to SU treatment; at the same time, changes in the level of sKIT (decreases vs. increases) also became indicators of TTP (HR=0.53; 95% CI, 0.37–0.75; P=0.0003), with decreases associated with longer TTP. This trend continued throughout the sampling period, with the effect persisting off treatment. Although the impact of SU on plasma sKIT levels continued to be seen after 2 cycles, sKIT changes became a better indicator of TTP than initial treatment group by cycle 2, day 28 (PTE = 0.62; HR=0.51; 95% CI, 0.38–0.69; P<0.0001), and at cycle 3, day 1 (PTE = 0.64; HR=0.42; 95% CI, 0.29–0.60; P<0.0001). Conclusion: These preliminary findings suggest that circulating sKIT may be a surrogate marker for TTP in GIST pts after 2 cycles of SU treatment. Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings and to establish whether sKIT can be used as a general surrogate marker of clinical outcomes in GIST pts with SU or other therapies. [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 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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment→French-language works237,207→