MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Outcomes of second targeted therapy in metastatic renal carcinoma: A retrospective chart review in the EU.

2016· article· en· W2589845673 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Yick Chin Heng, Jinhee Park, James Signorovitch, Hongbo Yang, Jinlin Song, Dony Patel, Chinjune Lin, Thomas Powles

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePazopanibSunitinibTargeted therapyAxitinibSorafenibRenal cell carcinomaEverolimusInternal medicineOncologySurgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

558 Background: This study describes the real-world outcomes of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with everolimus (EVE), sorafenib (SOR), and axitinib (AXI) as 2nd targeted therapy in the UK, Germany, and France. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted among oncologists and urologists in the UK, Germany and France. Charts were reviewed for adult mRCC patients satisfying the following eligibility criteria: 1) experienced disease progression on 1st targeted therapy with sunitinib or pazopanib; 2) initiated 2nd targeted therapy with EVE, AXI, or SOR between 10/2012 and 6/2013. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate overall survival (OS) after initiation of 2nd targeted therapy among all patients and stratified by type of 2nd targeted therapy. Results: A total of 281 charts were reviewed, with 99, 91, and 91 mRCC patients receiving EVE, AXI, and SOR as 2nd targeted therapy, respectively. Mean age was 60.6 years old at initial mRCC diagnosis and 65.5% were male. The majority of patients used sunitinib (79.4%), with the rest using pazopanib (20.6%) as 1st targeted therapy. Median duration of 1st targeted therapy was 9.7 months. At the initiation of 2nd targeted therapy, 91.8% of patients had an ECOG score ≤ 2. The most common sites of metastases were lung (71.2%), bone (53.0%), and lymph nodes (47.0%). Median OS from the initiation of 2nd targeted therapy among all patients was 21.8 months (95% CI: 16.5-26.2). The median OS was 23.0, 23.5, and 18.7 for EVE, AXI, and SOR respectively. The majority of patients (87.5%) initiated 2nd targeted therapy on the recommended dose. Patients receiving AXI had a higher rate of dose increase (13.2%), compared to EVE (1.0%) and SOR (0.0%), while patients on EVE had a higher rate of dose decrease (12.1%), compared to AXI (5.5%) and SOR (8.8%). Conclusions: In this retrospective chart review study of several EU countries, the observed median OS was numerically comparable for EVE and AXI, but rates of dose adjustment differed by treatments. Retrospective chart reviews may be subject to selection bias and errors in data entry, and further analysis is underway to address confounding effects of unobserved patient characteristics.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicRenal cell carcinoma treatment→French-language works237,207→