MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

<i>nab</i>-paclitaxel (<i>nab</i>-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) vs Gem alone as adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic cancer (PC) in a phase III trial (APACT).

2015· article· en· W2400393648 on OpenAlexaff
Margaret A. Tempero, Dana B. Cardin, Andrew V. Biankin, David Goldstein, Malcolm J. Moore, Eileen M. O’Reilly, Philip Agop Philip, Hanno Riess, Teresa Macarulla, Lotus Yung, LI Ming-yu, Brian Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGemcitabineInterim analysisRandomizationInternal medicineClinical endpointAdjuvantOncologyPancreatic cancerCancerSurgeryClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS4153 Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy for resected PC has been shown to decrease recurrence and increase survival. Gem alone is a standard adjuvant therapy option. nab-P + Gem was superior to Gem alone as first-line treatment in a phase III trial in patients (pts) with metastatic PC, including the primary endpoint of overall survival (median, 8.5 vs 6.7 months; HR 0.72; P < 0.001). Toxicities were manageable. Based on these findings in the metastatic setting, the APACT trial will compare nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone in the adjuvant setting. Methods: Pts with histologically confirmed PC who underwent macroscopic complete resection (R0 or R1) within 12 weeks of randomization, with no evidence of metastasis at screening, are eligible for enrollment. Other eligibility criteria include staging of T1-3, N0-1, M0; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1; acceptable hematologic function; CA19-9 < 100 U/mL prior to randomization; and no prior neoadjuvant therapy or radiation for PC. Pts with neuroendocrine tumors, any other malignancy within 5 years of randomization, infection with HIV or hepatitis B or C, or prior neoadjuvant treatment or radiation therapy for PC are ineligible. The planned enrollment of ≈ 800 pts will allow 90% power to detect an HR for disease-free survival (DFS) of 0.74 at a 2-sided significance level of 0.05. One interim safety analysis and 2 interim efficacy analyses (the first for futility and the second for futility and efficacy) will be performed. Pt enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial NCT01964430. Clinical trial information: NCT01964430. Planned N ≈ 800 Investigational arm nab-P 125 mg/m2 plus Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle × 6 cycles Control arm Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle × 6 cycles Randomization 1:1 Stratification factors Resection status (R0 vs R1) Nodal status (lymph node + vs lymph node −) Geographic region (North America vs Europe vs Australia vs Asia Pacific) Primary endpoint DFS (independently assessed) Secondary endpoints OS, safety Exploratory endpoints Molecular profiling of tumor tissue to correlate tumor heterogeneity with clinical outcome Quality of life as assessed by the EORTC questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PAN26

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.316
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research→French-language works237,207→