MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A randomized phase II study of axitinib (AG-013736) and gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer, preceded by a phase I component

2007· article· en· W2528569069 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Philippe Spano, Catherine Chodkiewicz, Joan Maurel, Ralph Wong, Harpreet Wasan, Yazdi K. Pithavala, Paul Bycott, Katherine Liau, S. Kim, Olivier Rixe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGemcitabineMedicineAxitinibPancreatic cancerInternal medicineChemotherapyCancerGastroenterologyUrologyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4551 Background: The current standard of care for patients (pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) is gemcitabine (GEM)- based chemotherapy. Axitinib (AG) is a potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors. A phase I study of AG in solid tumors identified 5 mg BID as the therapeutic starting dose. The main objectives of this trial are to determine whether the overall survival (OS) of the combination of AG and GEM is superior to that of GEM alone as first-line therapy in pts with APC, and to determine doses of AG and GEM that can be safely administered together. Methods: 8 pts were treated on the phase 1 (P1) portion of this trial. For the phase 2 (P2) portion of the trial, 103 pts with locally advanced or metastatic disease, no prior GEM or VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors, PS 0–2 were randomized (2:1) to GEM 1,000 mg/m2 over 30 minutes on days (D) 1, 8, 15 every 28 D with or without AG at a starting dose of 5 mg po BID between Jan 06 and Aug 06. CT scans were performed every 2 cycles. Results: Data from the evaluable P1 pts (n=5) indicated that PK of GEM and AG appeared to be unchanged in combination. The GEM mean plasma exposure (AUC) was 11,348 alone vs 12,840 ng.h/mL with AG; similarly mean steady-state AG AUC was 250 alone vs 270 ng.h/mL with GEM. 3 of 8 pts had a PR. The median number of days on study drug was 158 days (range: 57–330 days) with 2 pts ongoing. Data from the randomized P2 pts: male 48%; median age 62 (36- 81); PS 0/1 vs 2: 91% vs 9%; 41% with locally advanced disease; 59% with metastatic disease. The most commonly reported adverse events are anemia (48%), alk phos elevations (48%), leukopenia (45%), neutropenia (42%), LFT elevations (39%), and thrombocytopenia (27%). The most common non-hematologic adverse events are nausea (24%), vomiting (20%), fatigue (19%), diarrhea (18%), anorexia (18%), constipation (13%), dyspnea (12%), and pyrexia (12%). 55 events have been reported in the 103 P2 pts. The pooled median OS is 203 days with a 95% CI of (158, not estimable). The median follow-up time is currently 223 days. Conclusions: AG can be safely administered at a starting dose of 5 mg BID in combination with standard dose GEM in patients with APC. Final safety and OS results by treatment arm will be presented. [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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.400 · 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

Citations18
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207