MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Nomogram to assess benefit of new over historical agents as salvage therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in non-randomized trials: Effect of atezolizumab on 12-month survival.

2017· article· en· W2598715439 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory R. Pond, Guru Sonpavde, Jonathan E. Rosenberg, Toni K. Choueiri, Joaquim Bellmunt, Ashley Marie Regazzi, Stephanie A. Mullane, Andrea Necchi, Daniele Raggi, Jae‐Lyun Lee, Soonil Lee, Joe Leigh Simpson, Christina Louise Derleth, Shih‐Wen Lin, Dean F. Bajorin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Clinical Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOncologyNomogramInternal medicineDocetaxelPazopanibSunitinibSalvage therapyAtezolizumabCarboplatinProgression-free survivalUrologyCancerChemotherapyOverall survivalPembrolizumabCisplatinImmunotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

346 Background: Early surrogate endpoints of benefit in mUC phase 2 salvage therapy trials are necessary to identify promising drugs, particularly for checkpoint inhibitors where response and progression-free survival are inadequate. We developed a nomogram using prognostic variables from phase 2 trials of historical agents to estimate 12 month survival to which observed survival in single arm trials could be compared. Methods: Data were obtained from phase II trials of salvage therapy for mUC for survival and 5 prognostic factors: hemoglobin, performance status, liver metastasis, treatment-free interval and albumin. Patients (pts) were randomly allotted to discovery:validation (DIS:VAL) datasets in a 2:1 ratio. A nomogram was developed for estimating 12-month survival. Calibration plots were constructed in the VAL dataset by plotting estimated vs. observed 12-mo survival and data bootstrapped to assess performance. The nomogram was applied to external nonrandomized salvage therapy data: 1) retrospective pemetrexed data or 2) trials of atezolizumab: PCD4989g and IMvigor210. Results: Data were available from 340 pts receiving sunitinib (n = 77), everolimus (n = 45), docetaxel + vandetanib or placebo (n = 109), pazopanib (n = 42), paclitaxel (n = 36) and docetaxel (n = 31). Calibration and prognostic ability of the model was acceptable (c-index = 0.634, 95% CI = 0.596-0.652). Observed 12-month survival for pts on pemetrexed (n = 127, 23.5% [95% CI: 16.2%-31.7%]) were similar to nomogram-predicted survival (19% [95% CI: 16.5-21.5], P> 0.05), while observed result with atezolizumab (n = 403, 39.0% [95% CI: 34.1-43.9]) exceeded predicted result (24.6% [95% CI: 23.4-25.8], P< 0.001). Conclusions: Atezolizumab was associated with a significantly longer 12-mo survival compared to nomogram-predicted survival while pemetrexed was not. This nomogram incorporates baseline prognostic factors to provide expected 12-mo survival of phase 2 patient cohorts with which to compare observed survival, thereby providing a useful tool to quantify benefit in phase II studies while controlling for the impact of clinical variables.

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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.333
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→