MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

EPIC: A phase III randomized, open-label study of ponatinib versus imatinib in adult patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase.

2013· article· en· W2468990687 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey H. Lipton, Michael W. Deininger, Stephanie Lustgarten, Christopher D. Turner, Victor M. Rivera, Tim Clackson, Michele Baccarani, Jörge E. Cortes, François Guilhot, Andreas Hochhaus, Timothy P. Hughes, Hagop M. Kantarjian, Neil P. Shah, Moshe Talpaz, Frank G. Haluska

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPonatinibMedicineImatinibMyeloid leukemiaInternal medicineOncologyImatinib mesylateTyrosine-kinase inhibitorNilotinibCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS7129 Background: The hallmark genetic abnormality of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), known as the Philadelphia chromosome, generates the BCR-ABL fusion gene; expression of BCR-ABL in hematopoietic stem cells gives rise to CML. Ponatinib is a potent oral pan–BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) that is active against native and mutated forms of BCR-ABL, including the T315I gatekeeper mutant. Results from the phase 1 and phase 2 studies of ponatinib demonstrated that ponatinib is generally well tolerated and has substantial anti-leukemic activity in patients with CML who are resistant or intolerant to prior TKI therapy, regardless of baseline mutation status. In addition, multivariate analyses suggest that ponatinib has greater activity in younger patients who are less heavily pretreated and have a shorter time since diagnosis. The phase 3 EPIC (Evaluation of Ponatinib vs Imatinib in CML) study is testing the hypothesis that ponatinib is an effective treatment for newly diagnosed chronic phase (CP) CML patients when compared with standard imatinib therapy. Methods: EPIC is a multicenter, international, phase 3, two-arm, open-label trial of ponatinib (45 mg once daily) versus imatinib (400 mg once daily) in patients with newly diagnosed CP-CML. Patients ≥18 years of age with CP-CML (diagnosed within 6 months prior to study entry) and adequate renal, hepatic, and pancreatic function are eligible for enrollment. Enrolled patients are assigned to receive ponatinib or imatinib in a 1:1 fashion, stratified by Sokal Risk score (low vs intermediate vs high). The primary efficacy endpoint for this trial is major molecular response (MMR) rate at 12 months. Secondary endpoints include MMR rate at 5 years, BCR-ABLIS<10% rate at 3 months, CCyR rate at 12 months, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. A sample size consisting of 480 patients will provide 90% power to detect a 15% absolute increase in MMR rate at 12 months using an unstratified Fisher exact 2-sided test at an alpha level of 0.05. Assuming a 10% dropout rate, approximately 528 patients will be enrolled. The first patient was enrolled in August 2012. Clinical trial information: NCT01650805.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.369 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicChronic Myeloid Leukemia TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207