Meeting An Unmet Need in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma with Regorafenib
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is a global issue, affecting men and women equally. Over the last 25 years, advances in therapy and multidisciplinary care have led to improvements in survival for those with colorectal cancer. Despite these advances, more therapeutic options are needed for those being treated for this disease.Regorafenib is an oral drug that is a new therapeutic option for our patients. The CORRECT and CONCUR trials demonstrate the efficacy of regorafenib in the last line setting. This article summarizes some of the regorafenib clinical trial data and discusses the strategies to help manage the side effects of this drug including patient education, dose reductions and interruptions, and monitoring hypertension and liver function. Colorectal cancer is a global issue, affecting men and women equally. Over the last 25 years, advances in therapy and multidisciplinary care have led to improvements in survival for those with colorectal cancer. Despite these advances, more therapeutic options are needed for those being treated for this disease.Regorafenib is an oral drug that is a new therapeutic option for our patients. The CORRECT and CONCUR trials demonstrate the efficacy of regorafenib in the last line setting. This article summarizes some of the regorafenib clinical trial data and discusses the strategies to help manage the side effects of this drug including patient education, dose reductions and interruptions, and monitoring hypertension and liver function.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".