MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and safety of everolimus in advanced, progressive, nonfunctional neuroendocrine tumors (NET) of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and unknown primary: A subgroup analysis of the phase III RADIANT-4 trial.

2016· article· en· W2493882687 on OpenAlexaff
Simron Singh, Carlo Carnaghi, Roberto Buzzoni, Rodney F. Pommier, Markus Raderer, Jiří Tomášek, Harald Lahner, Juan W. Valle, Maurizio Voi, Lida Bubuteishvili‐Pacaud, Jeremie Lincy, Carolin Sachs, Natsuko Okita, Steven K. Libutti, Do‐Youn Oh, Matthew H. Kulke, Jonathan Strosberg, James C. Yao, Marianne Pavel, Nicola Fazio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGastroenterologyIleumInternal medicineRectumJejunumEverolimusNeuroendocrine tumorsPlaceboClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

315 Background: In the groundbreaking, phase 3 RCT RADIANT-4 study, everolimus (EVE) significantly prolonged median progression-free survival (PFS) by 7.1 mo in patients (pts) with advanced, progressive, nonfunctional NET of GI or lung vs placebo (PBO); HR, 0.48 (95%CI, 0.35-0.67), P<0.00001 [Yao JC et al, ECC-ESMO, 2015]. Methods: InRADIANT-4, pts with advanced, progressive, well-differentiated (G1/G2), nonfunctional GI or lung NET were randomized (2:1) to EVE (10 mg/d) or PBO. In this analysis, pts with NET of GI tract (stomach, colon, rectum, appendix, caecum, ileum, duodenum, jejunum, or small intestine) and unknown primary were included. Results: Of 302 pts, 175 had GI NET (EVE [n=118], PBO [n=57]); 36 had NET of unknown primary (EVE [23], PBO [13]). In GI NET pts, median age was 63 y; females: 55%; G1/G2: 75%/25%; WHO PS: 0, 78% or 1, 22%; Caucasian: 73%. Similar baseline characteristics were observed in pts with NET of unknown primary. Ileum (41%), rectum (23%) and jejunum (13%) were the most common locations in GI subgroup. The table below lists prior treatments. In pts with GI NET, median PFS (95% CI) by central review (EVE vs PBO) was 13.1 (9.2-17.3) mo vs 5.4 (3.6-9.3) mo with an estimated 44% risk-reduction in favor of EVE (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84). In pts with NET of unknown primary, median PFS (95% CI) by central review (EVE vs PBO) was 13.6 (4.1-not evaluable) mo vs 7.5 (1.9-18.5) mo (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.24-1.51). The most frequent G3/4 adverse events irrespective of drug-relationship reported in ≥5% pts in GI subgroup were diarrhea, hypertension, stomatitis, abdominal pain, fatigue, and acute renal failure. Conclusions: The present subgroup analysis of RADIANT-4 study demonstrated improvement in PFS with EVE for pts with GI NET, and suggests efficacy in NET of unknown primary, with an estimated 40% to 44% risk-reduction in favor of EVE vs PBO. Safety profile for EVE is consistent with that previously reported. Clinical trial information: NCT01524783. [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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.376 · 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.

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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207