MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Subgroup analyses of METEOR, a randomized phase 3 trial of cabozantinib versus everolimus in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

2016· article· en· W2591397831 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard Escudier, Robert J. Motzer, Thomas Powles, Nizar M. Tannir, Ian D. Davis, Frede Donskov, Viktor Grünwald, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, Thomas Hutson, Bohuslav Melichar, D. Nosov, Brian I. Rini, Pamela Salman, Cora N. Sternberg, Cezary Szczylik, Pascal Wolter, Alan M Arroyo, Milan Mangeshkar, Neeraj Agarwal, Toni K. Choueiri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCabozantinibMedicineClinical endpointEverolimusInternal medicineInterim analysisPopulationOncologyRenal cell carcinomaRandomized controlled trialPazopanibProgression-free survivalSunitinibUrologyOverall survival

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

499 Background: Cabozantinib (C) inhibits tyrosine kinases including VEGFRs, MET, and AXL. The METEOR phase 3 trial (NCT01865747) met its primary endpoint of significant improvement in PFS with C versus everolimus (E) in pts with advanced clear cell RCC and prior exposure to VEGFR TKIs (7.4 mo median PFS [C] vs 3.8 mo [E], HR = 0.58, 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.75; p < 0.001). The improvement in PFS was accompanied by a significant improvement in ORR and a trend for improved OS at an interim analysis. Safety profiles of C and E in this trial were similar to prior experience with each drug in this pt population. This analysis further evaluates PFS and ORR across pt subgroups. Methods: Pts had advanced RCC with clear cell component, measurable disease per RECIST 1.1, KPS ≥ 70%, and were stratified by MSKCC prognostic criteria and number of prior VEGFR TKIs. Pts must have progressed during treatment or within 6 months of the last dose of their most recent VEGFR TKI. 658 pts were randomized 1:1 to receive C (60 mg QD) or E (10 mg QD). The primary endpoint was PFS among the first 375 pts randomized. ORR was a secondary endpoint. Results: In the PFS group, 187 pts were randomized to C and 188 to E. 73% pts had 1 and 27% pts ≥ 2 prior VEGFR TKIs; 43% pts had favorable, 41% intermediate, and 15% poor risk by MSKCC criteria. Across multiple subgroups defined by baseline characteristics, PFS HRs favored C over E. PFS HRs were similar for subgroups defined by prior number of TKIs (HR = 0.56 [1 prior] and 0.67 [ ≥ 2 prior]), and showed higher activity of C over E in pts with fewer MSKCC risk factors (HR = 0.54 [0 factors], 0.56 [1 factor], 0.84 [ ≥ 2 factors]) or with metastases in various organs (HR = 0.47 [lung mets], 0.53 [liver mets], 0.50 [bone mets]). Detailed analysis of the clinical activity of C and E (PFS and ORR) across pt subgroups will be presented, including treatment duration with first VEGFR TKI ( < or ≥ 6mo), receipt of prior anti-PD1/PDL1 agents, time to progression after most recent TKI ( < or ≥ 3mo), and frequency/location of metastases. Conclusions: The METEOR trial met its primary endpoint of improved PFS, and subgroup analyses of the endpoints PFS and ORR generally favored C over E in patients with advanced RCC. Clinical trial information: NCT01865747.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.010
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207