MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sunitinib (SU) in patients with advanced, progressive pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET): Final overall survival (OS) results from a phase III randomized study including adjustment for crossover.

2016· article· en· W2494392860 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Raymond, Patricia Niccoli, Daniel Castellano, Juan W. Valle, Pascal Hammel, Jean‐Luc Raoul, Aaron I. Vinik, Yung‐Jue Bang, Se‐Hoon Lee, Ivan Borbath, C. Lombard Bohas, Peter Metrakos, Denis Smith, Jen‐Shi Chen, Jean François Seitz, Shem Patyna, Xin Huang, Jack Ishak, Sandrine Faivre, Philippe Ruszniewski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical endpointInternal medicinePopulationGastroenterologyProgression-free survivalRandomized controlled trialSunitinibLog-rank testPlaceboProportional hazards modelOverall survivalUrologySurgeryCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

309 Background: In 2010, the pivotal double blind Phase III study met its primary endpoint with a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 11.4 months (mo) for sunitinib vs. 5.5 mo for placebo (PBO) (HR=0.42; 95% CI 0.26-0.66; P <0.001) in patients (pts) with advanced, progressive pNET. This trial showed an OS difference favouring sunitinib (HR=0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.89; P = 0.02). At 2 years since study closure, median OS was 33.0 mo for SU and 26.7 mo for PBO (HR=0.71; 95% CI 0.47-1.09; P = 0.115). Methods: A total of 171 pts were randomly assigned 1:1 to SU 37.5 mg continuous daily dose (n = 86) or PBO (n = 85). The primary end-point was investigator assessed PFS. Pts receiving PBO could crossover to SU at disease progression. Final OS at 5 years follow-up since study closure was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. In addition, a series of methods were used to adjust for cross-over including rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT). Clinical trial information: NCT00428597 . Results: At 5 years follow-up since study closure, the median OS was 38.6 mo for those randomized to SU and 29.1 mo for those randomized to PBO (HR=0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.06; P = 0.094). In total, 59 pts randomized to PBO (69%) crossed over to SU. OS results obtained applying methods to adjust for cross-over are shown in Table 1. Conclusions: The 5-year OS difference (9.5 mo) between SU and PBO is confirmed. Correction for crossover yielded a stronger OS advantage with SU, confirming that crossover likely confounded the OS results. Clinical trial information: NCT00428597. [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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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