MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560331278 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-1968

Exploring the Benefit/Risk Associated with Antiangiogenic Agents for the Treatment of Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients

2016· review· en· W2560331278 on OpenAlexaff
Razelle Kurzrock, David J. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNintedanibVandetanibRamucirumabSunitinibBevacizumabErlotinibLung cancerOncologyAfliberceptSorafenibInternal medicineVascular endothelial growth factorPopulationCancerCancer researchEpidermal growth factor receptorHepatocellular carcinomaIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosisLungChemotherapyVEGF receptors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Following the approval of bevacizumab, an antibody targeting VEGF-A, for advanced non-squamous non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in 2006, intensive efforts were put into the clinical development of antiangiogenic agents for NSCLC. Currently, the other antiangiogenic agents approved for NSCLC are ramucirumab, a VEGF receptor-2 (VEGFR-2)–targeting antibody indicated for both squamous and non-squamous NSCLC in the United States, and nintedanib, an anti–VEGFR-1/2/3, platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α/β, fibroblast growth factor receptor-1/2/3 angiokinase inhibitor indicated for adenocarcinoma of the lung in the European Union. Many other antiangiogenic agents are being evaluated in phase III trials for NSCLC, including aflibercept, sunitinib, sorafenib, cediranib, and vandetanib. Although many of the same signaling pathways are targeted by these novel agents, mixed efficacy results have been observed in these trials. Moreover, safety issues have raised concerns about using antiangiogenic agents in this patient population, and fatal bleeding events have been reported. Importantly, although no biomarker has yet been validated for antiangiogenic agents in NSCLC, biomarkers that show potential include circulating levels of short VEGF-A isoforms, expression of neuropilin-1 and VEGFR-1 in tumors and plasma, genetic variants in VEGF-A and VEGFR, and tumor protein p53 mutations (with the latter having been shown to correlate with increased levels of VEGF-A transcripts). This review provides an overview of the clinical benefit and risk associated with the use of antiangiogenic agents for NSCLC, and summarizes the research to date on the identification of predictive biomarkers for antiangiogenic therapies. Clin Cancer Res; 23(5); 1137–48. ©2016 AACR.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.428
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.132 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207