Cabozantinib in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: clinical trial evidence and experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is rapidly changing. During first-line treatment with targeted therapy, patients ultimately develop resistance to therapy and the disease progresses. Recently, cabozantinib has demonstrated a better response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival compared with everolimus after failure of prior targeted therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Cabozantinib is a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). It exerts inhibition of MET, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor type 2, AXL, and many other receptor tyrosine kinases that are also implicated in tumor pathobiology, including RET, KIT, and FLT3. MET drives tumor survival, invasion, angiogenesis, and metastasis through several downstream signaling pathways. AXL has recently been described as an essential mediator of cancer metastasis that mediates crosstalk and resistance to TKIs. MET and AXL are thought to be anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGF) resistance pathways and thus cabozantinib represents a logical choice after progression on initial VEGF therapy. Subgroup analyses examining those with good performance status or visceral and bone metastases indicate that the hazard ratios may be better when using cabozantinib versus everolimus. However, there were no clear statistically significant differences between any subgroups.
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) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".