MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332752715 · doi:10.18632/oncotarget.8350

A window of opportunity study of potential tumor and soluble biomarkers of response to preoperative erlotinib in early stage non-small cell lung cancer

2016· article· en· W2332752715 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adrian G. Sacher, Lisa W. Le, Humberto Lara-Guerra, Thomas K. Waddell, Shingo Sakashita, Zhuo Chen, Lucia Kim, Tong Zhang, Suzanne Kamel‐Reid, Alexandra Salvarrey, Gail Darling, Kazuhiro Yasufuku, Shaf Keshavjee, Marc de Perrot, Frances A. Shepherd, Geoffrey Liu, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Natasha B. Leighl

Bibliographic record

VenueOncotarget · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErlotinibMedicineLung cancerStage (stratigraphy)OncologyWindow of opportunityInternal medicineBiomarkerErlotinib HydrochlorideCancerEpidermal growth factor receptorBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

// Adrian G. Sacher 1, 5 , Lisa W. Le 2 , Humberto Lara-Guerra 3 , Thomas K. Waddell 3 , Shingo Sakashita 4 , Zhuo Chen 1 , Lucia Kim 4 , Tong Zhang 4 , Suzanne Kamel-Reid 4 , Alexandra Salvarrey 1, 3 , Gail Darling 3 , Kazuhiro Yasufuku 3 , Shaf Keshavjee 3 , Marc de Perrot 3 , Frances A. Shepherd 1 , Geoffrey Liu 1 , Ming Sound Tsao 3 , Natasha B. Leighl 1 1 Division of Medical Oncology/Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada 2 Department of Biostatistics, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada 3 Division of Thoracic Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada 4 Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada 5 Division of Hematology and Oncology, Columbia University/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, USA Correspondence to: Natasha B. Leighl, e-mail: Natasha.Leighl@uhn.ca Keywords: erlotinib, NSCLC, preoperative window study Received: May 04, 2015      Accepted: March 10, 2016      Published: March 25, 2016 ABSTRACT Background: Erlotinib is highly active in EGFR mutant NSCLC, but may benefit some with wild-type tumors. We examined pre-operative erlotinib in early stage NSCLC to assess response and correlation with potential biomarkers. Results: Twenty-five patients were enrolled; 22 received erlotinib treatment and were evaluable (median follow-up 4.4 years). Histology was predominantly adenocarcinoma although 31% had squamous carcinoma. PET response was observed in 2 patients (9%), both with squamous carcinoma. Most (20/22) had stable disease (RECIST), with frequent minor radiographic regression and histologic findings of fibrosis/necrosis including in squamous histology. Only two had EGFR mutations identified, one with minor radiographic response and the other stable disease after 4 weeks of EGFR TKI. High pre-treatment serum levels of TGF-α correlated with primary resistance to erlotinib ( p = 0.02), whereas high post-treatment soluble EGFR levels correlated with response ( p = 0.03). EGFR, PTEN, cMET and AXL expression did not correlate with tumor response. Methods: Clinical stage IA–IIB NSCLC patients received erlotinib 150 mg daily for 4 weeks followed by resection. Tumor response was assessed using CT, PET and pathological response. Tumor genotype was established using Sequenom Mass ARRAY; EGFR, PTEN, cMET and AXL expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry, circulating markers of EGFR activation (TGF-α, amphiregulin, epiregulin, EGFR ECD) by ELISA and EGFR, MET copy number by FISH. Conclusions: Erlotinib appears to demonstrate activity in EGFR wild-type tumors including squamous carcinoma. Further research is needed to characterize those wild-type patients that may benefit from EGFR TKI and predictive biomarkers including TGF-α, EGFR copy and others.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.302 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncotargetSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207