SWOG 0941: A phase II study of sorafenib and erlotinib in patients (pts) with advanced gallbladder cancer or cholangiocarcinoma.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4113 Background: The treatment of pts with advanced biliary cancers represents a therapeutic challenge. The vascular endothelial growth factor and epidermal growth factor receptor pathways play an important role in biliary carcinogenesis, as evidenced by their up-regulation and prognostic impact. Methods: The primary objective was progression free survival (PFS) (improvement in PFS from 4 to 8 months); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and toxicity. A two-stage design was used; if 13 or more eligible pts of the 25 initially accrued were alive without progression at 4 months, an additional 25 were to be accrued. Eligibility criteria included no prior treatment for advanced or metastatic disease, histologic diagnosis of gallbladder cancer or cholangiocarcinoma, presence of measurable disease, Zubrod performance status 0-1, AST/ALT ≤ 5 IULN, total bilirubin ≤1.5 IULN, adequate hematologic function. Pts were treated with sorafenib 400 mg PO BID and erlotinib 100 mg PO q daily continuously. Restaging scans were performed every 8 weeks. Results: 32 eligible pts were accrued. 30 pts were evaluable for response. 2 patients (7 %) had an unconfirmed partial response (95% CI:1%-23%), and 8 pts (27%) had stable disease. Median PFS was 2 months (95% CI: 2-3 months). 22/32 patients progressed or died within 4 months of registration. Median OS was 6 months (95% CI: 3 -7 months). The study failed to meet its primary endpoint to proceed to the second stage of accrual. There were 3 deaths on study, 1 of which was possibly related to treatment. 19 patients (59%) had grade 3 or 4 toxicities: AST/ALT (22%), bilirubin (16%), alkaline phosphatase (16%), hypertension (16%), diarrhea (9%), hepatic infection (6%). Conclusions: This multicenter study was the first to evaluate the combination of sorafenib and erlotinib in pts with advanced biliary cancers. Despite manageable toxicity, the study failed to meet its primary endpoint. Correlative studies on collected tissue and blood are ongoing; improved pt selection based on tumor biology and molecular markers is necessary for future evaluation of targeted therapies in this disease.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".