MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SUNCAP, a phase II study with sunitinib and capecitabine in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) refractory to previous treatment with 5FU/irinotecan/oxaliplatin.

2011· article· en· W2590354601 on OpenAlexaff
Benoît Samson, Jean Latreille, Nghia T. Nguyen, Catherine Sperlich, Djamal Berbiche, C. Tournigand

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital Charles-Le Moyne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSunitinibIrinotecanCapecitabineOxaliplatinInternal medicineColorectal cancerRefractory (planetary science)OncologyKRASPhases of clinical researchToxicityGastroenterologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

545 Background: Patients (pts) with MCRC refractory/resistant to Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin have a poor prognosis. Sunitinib is an oral TKI that selectively inhibits the VEGFR 1, 2, 3, PDGFR and FLT3, CSF-1R, RET. Phase II studies with single agent sunitinib in patients with MCRC did not demonstrate a meaningful ORR but showed acceptable safety profile and warranted further study. Methods: We conducted a phase II escalating dose of sunitinib (S) and capecitabine (C) to assess the efficacy of this oral treatment given on a 2 wks every 3 wks schedule, (level 0, S: 37,5 mg, C: 2,000mg/m2, level +1, S: 50 mg, C: 2,000 mg/m2, level +2, S: 50 mg, C: 2,500 mg/m2 and level -1:S: 25 mg, C: 1,500 mg/m2. Treatment was initiated at level 0 and increased at level +1 and +2 at cycle 3 and 5 if no grade 2/3 toxicity was observed. Between 02.2009 and 06.2010, 15 pts previously exposed to oxaliplatin/irinotecan/bevazizumab were enrolled, all of them had progressive disease at the time of study entry. Primary objective was ORR. Treatment was given until PD or unacceptable toxicity. Results: Pts characteristics were: sex: 12M/3F, median age: 65 years [41-75], primary tumors: colon: 13, rectum: 2, ECOG PS 0/1: 8/7, median nb of metastatic sites: 3, KRAS status: WT/MT/Unknown: 1/9/5. Escalating to level +1:53%, level +2: 7%. Median nb of cycles received/pt: 5. All pts were evaluable for toxicity (tox): SAEs: 40%, any tox. grade 1/2/3(%): 93/60/ 40. Neutropenia gr. 1/2/3(%): 13/13/7, thrombocytopenia gr.1/2/3(%): 13/20/7. Fatigue gr.1/2/3(%): 27/20/7. Nausea gr.1: 27%. Diarrhea gr.1: 13%. Hand foot syndrome gr. 1/2/3 (%): 13/13/27. Mucositis gr. 1/2/3(%): 7/20/7. Hypertension gr.2: 13%. Thyroïd gr.1: 27%. ORR (CR+PR): 0%, confirmed SD: 7/15: 47%, PD: 8/15: 53%. Median PFS: 137 days [95%CI: 112-162], median OS: 291 days [95%CI: 99-482]. Conclusions: In this heavily pretreated patients, sunitinib in combination with capecitabine appears feasible, with acceptable toxicity. 47% of patients had a confirmed stable disease. Although no objective response was observed, the high level of stable disease may suggest a role of this combination for maintenance therapy. [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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207