MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Randomized phase II trial of irofulven (IROF)/prednisone (P), IROF/capecitabine (C)/P or mitoxantrone (M)/P in docetaxel-pretreated hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) patients (pts)

2006· article· en· W2599456777 on OpenAlexaff
L. Hart, Tudor–Eliade Ciuleanu, John D. Hainsworth, Stéphane Oudard, É. Berger, J. Alexandre, K. N., Dean Ruether, John R. MacDonald, Esteban Cvitkovic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDocetaxelMitoxantroneClinical endpointCapecitabineInternal medicineProstate cancerUrologyRefractory (planetary science)GastroenterologyPhases of clinical researchChemotherapyRandomized controlled trialSurgeryOncologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

14513 Background: IROF, a semisynthetic derivative of the natural product illudin S, is a novel DNA binding agent. IROF alone or in combination has shown activity in phase I-II trials in HRPC, notably with IROF/C (Cvitkovic et al, ASCO 2004). Methods: Pts with histologically-proven metastatic HRPC who progressed (RECIST or PSA) during prior docetaxel or within 3 months of discontinuing treatment, with adequate hematologic and organ functions and KPS ≥70% were stratified by pain and randomized to one of three treatments: Arm A: IROF (0.45 mg/kg, day 1 and 8 q3weeks [w]) and P (10 mg po daily); Arm B: IROF (0.4 mg/kg day 1 and 15), C(2000 mg/m2 day 1–15 q4w) and P; or Arm C: M (12 mg/m2 q3w) and P. Primary endpoint was TTP (RECIST, PSA or clinical progression); secondary endpoints included PSA response (≥50% decrease for ≥4 w), pain response, and toxicity; 135 pts are planned in a 2:2:1 ratio. The study was powered to detect a difference in TTP of 1.5 vs 3 months. Results: As of Dec 2005, 78 pts were randomized and treated with ≥ 5 months follow-up (A/B/C: 31/31/16). Median age (A/B/C) 69/70/61, KPS ≥80% 24/28/9, median baseline PSA ng/mL 90/147/235, disease related pain at baseline 61%/58%/63%; other characteristics, including metastatic site distribution, were similar between arms. Safety: 65 pts were evaluated for safety. Median cycles/Pt (A, B, C) 3/2/2; grade 3/4 toxicities (% pts A, B, C): asthenia (4%, 16%, 0%), vomiting (0%, 12%, 0%) and diarrhea (4%, 8%, 0%). The most common grade 3/4 laboratory abnormalities were neutropenia (10%, 6%, 31%) and thrombocytopenia (15%, 12%, 0%). Conclusion: IROF in combination with P and, in particular, C/P shows improved activity and acceptable tolerance compared to M/P in docetaxel-resistant HRPC. Patient accrual is complete as of Jan 2006, and final results will be presented. [Table: see text] [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)0.001
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.395 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207