Overall survival (OS) and safety of dasatinib/docetaxel versus docetaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): Results from the randomized phase III READY trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LBA8 Background: SRC kinases may contribute to androgen independence of mCRPC.Dasatinib (DAS) inhibits tyrosine kinases including SRC kinases with preclinical evidence for antimetastatic activity, inhibition of osteoclast function in tumor microenvironment, and synergistic activity with docetaxel (D). In phase I/II trials of mCRPC patients (pts), DAS in combination with D had an acceptable safety profile with objective response rates (ORR) improved over historical data and decreased levels of bone turnover markers. Methods: READY was a multinational, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase III study. Pts with mCRPC (n = 1,522) were randomized (1:1) to receive either D 75 mg/m 2 q3wk + prednisone with double-blinded DAS 100 mg qd (DAS/D, n = 762) or placebo (PBO/D, n = 760). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were ORR, time to first skeletal-related event (TFSRE), time to prostate-specific antigen progression (TPSAP), urinary N-telopeptide (uNTX) reduction, pain reduction, progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Results: No OS difference between DAS/D and PBO/D (median, 21.5 vs. 21.2 mos; hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; log-rank P = 0.90) was observed. Results of secondary endpoints for DAS/D vs. PBO/D were: ORR (30.5 vs. 31.9%); TFSRE (median, not reached vs. 31.1 mos; HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.64-1.02]); uNTX reduction (66.0 vs. 60.6%); PFS (median, 11.8 vs. 11.1 mos; HR, 0.92); TPSAP (median, 8.0 vs. 7.6 mos; HR, 0.91), and pain reduction (66.6 vs. 71.5%). Twenty-three percent of DAS/D and 14% of PBO/D pts received therapy for <3 mos. Most common AEs in DAS/D arm included diarrhea, fatigue, alopecia, and nausea. Grade 3-4 AEs of interest for DAS/D vs. PBO/D included anemia (8.0 vs.5.9%), neutropenia (6.2 vs. 5.5%), hypocalcemia (3.5 vs.3.1%), GI bleeding (2.6 vs.1.3%), and pleural effusion (1.3 vs. 0.4%). Conclusions: The addition of DAS to standard-of-care chemotherapy in mCRPC pts did not improve OS. There was a modest reduction in the risk of TFSRE with DAS/D vs. PBO/D. With a median follow-up of 19 mos of 761 DAS/D-treated pts, no unexpected toxicities for DAS were observed. Clinical trial information: NCT00744497.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".