MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586519388 · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.6728

Correlation of Long-term Results of Imatinib in Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors With Next-Generation Sequencing Results

2017· article· en· W2586519388 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C. Heinrich, Cathryn Rankin, Charles D. Blanke, George D. Demetri, Ernest C. Borden, Christopher W. Ryan, Margaret von Mehren, Martin E. Blackstein, Dennis A. Priebat, William D. Tap, Robert G. Maki, Christopher L. Corless, Jonathan A. Fletcher, Kouros Owzar, John J. Crowley, Robert S. Benjamin, Laurence H. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsMedicineGiSTImatinib mesylateInternal medicineImatinibOncologyClinical trialClinical endpointPDGFRARandomized controlled trialSurvival rateGastroenterologyStromal cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: After identification of activating mutations of the KIT gene in gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST)-the most common sarcomaof the gastrointestinal tract-a phase 2 study demonstrated efficacy of imatinib mesylate in patients with metastatic GIST harboring a KIT exon 11 mutation. Initial results of long-term follow-up have found a survival benefit in this subgroup of patients. OBECTIVE: To assess the long-term survival of patients with GIST who were treated in SWOG study S0033 and to present new molecular data regarding treatment outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this follow-up of randomized clinical trial participants (from December 15, 2000, to September 1, 2001), patients were required to have advanced GIST that was not surgically curable. Postprotocol data collection occurred from August 29, 2011, to July 15, 2015. Using modern sequencing technologies, 20 cases originally classified as having wild-type tumors underwent reanalysis. This intergroup study was coordinated by SWOG, a cooperative group member within the National Clinical Trials Network, with participation by member/affiliate institutions. This follow-up was not planned as part of the initial study. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to 1 of 2 dose levels of imatinib mesylate, including 400 mg once daily (400 mg/d) vs 400 mg twice daily (800 mg/d), and were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects of the drug occurred. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was overall survival. Updated survival data were correlated with clinical and molecular factors, and patterns of postprotocol therapies were enumerated and described in long-term survivors. RESULTS: Of 695 eligible patients (376 men [54.1%]; 319 women [45.9%]; mean [SD] age, 60.1 [14.0] years), 189 survived 8 years or longer, including 95 in the 400-mg/d dose arm and 94 in the 800-mg/d arm. The 10-year estimate of overall survival was 23% (95% CI, 20%-26%). Among 142 long-term survivors, imatinib was the sole therapy administered in 69 (48.6%), with additional systemic agents administered to 54 patients (38.0%). Resequencing studies of 20 cases originally classified as KIT/PDGFRA wild-type GIST revealed that 17 (85.0%) harbored a pathogenic mutation, most commonly a mutation of a subunit of the succinate dehydrogenase complex. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A subset of patients with metastatic GIST experiences durable, long-term overall survival with imatinib treatment. Although this study provides guidance for management of GIST harboring the most common KIT and PDGFRA mutations, optimal management of other genotypic subtypes remains unclear. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00009906.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations126
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA OncologySame topicGastrointestinal Tumor Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207