MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical benefit rate (CBR) of panitumumab monotherapy among patients with KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2012· article· en· W2590667995 on OpenAlexaff
Hagen F. Kennecke, Howard J. Lim, B. S. Johal, Muhammad Zulfiqar, Caroline Speers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIrinotecanOxaliplatinPanitumumabBevacizumabInternal medicineClinical endpointKRASColorectal cancerCapecitabineOncologyResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsCetuximabTolerabilityPhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyCancerClinical trialChemotherapyAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e14176 Background: Panitumumab (Pmab) improves progression free survival as first-, second- and third-line therapy for KRAS wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Only in the third-line setting is there evidence of benefit of Pmab monotherapy. In this analysis of an exploratory biomarker study of Pmab monotherapy, the clinical benefit rate of Pmab according to previous lines of therapy is described. Methods: Patients (pts) with KRAS non-mutated, measurable MCRC previously treated with or ineligible for oxaliplatin/5-FU and irinotecan were treated with Pmab 6mg/kg IV q2w until progression or toxicity. The primary endpoint is clinical benefit rate (complete (CR) or partial response (PR) + prolonged stable disease (PSD) > = 24 weeks) by RECIST criteria. Results: The study completed accrual and (40) evaluable patients were treated between September 2009 and December 2011 of which 32 were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Median follow-up was 8.8 months, median age was 64.5 years and 90% were ECOG 0/1. Previous therapy was: 5-FU/Capecitabine(C) only in 12 pts, Irinotecan/5-FU/C only in 2 patients, Oxaliplatin/5-FU/C only in 3 pts, Oxaliplatin/Irinotecan/5-FU/C in 23 pts. 22 patients received prior Bevacizumab. Median number of cycles was 8 and 6 pts required a dose modification. There were 7 (22%) PRs and 7 (22%) pts experienced PSD >=24 weeks. Clinical benefit rate (PR+PSD) according to previous therapy was 33% (3/9) for 5FU/C only, 100% (2/2) Oxaliplatin/FU/C only, 0% (0/2) Irinotecan/FU/C only, and 47% (9/19) for Oxaliplatin/Irinotecan/5FU/C. Conclusions: Pmab monotherapy is well tolerated and response rates vary according to previous lines of therapy. Patients ineligible for irinotecan and/or oxaliplatin experience a high clinical benefit rate with single agent Panitumumab and should be considered for such therapy. Updated study results will be presented.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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