MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A randomized phase II study (VEG108838) of lapatanib plus pazopanib (L+P) versus lapatanib (L) in patients with ErbB2+ inflammatory breast cancer (IBC).

2012· article· en· W2600462870 on OpenAlexaff
Massimo Cristofanilli, Stephen Johnston, Alexey Manikhas, Henry Gómez, Oleg Gladkov, Zhimin Shao, Sufia Safina, Stephen D. Rubin, Sulabha Ranganathan, Suman Lata, Maureen Trudeau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineGastroenterologyNeutropeniaClinical endpointCohortPlaceboPopulationRandomized controlled trialPazopanibSurgeryCancerToxicityPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

531 Background: ErbB2 amplification is frequently reported in IBC and there is evidence of positive association between ErbB2 and VEGF expression. We evaluated the combination of anti ErbB2 and VEGF therapy in ErbB2+ IBC. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, randomized clinical trial for patients (pts) with relapsed ErbB2+ IBC. Cohort 1: Pts stratified (prior trastuzumab; cutaneous disease only vs systemic) and randomized 1:1 to receive L 1500 mg + placebo or L 1500 mg + P 800 mg, QD. Due to high incidence of Grade 3/4 diarrhea in pts treated with L 1500 mg+ P 800 mg in another study, Cohort 1 was closed after 76 pts randomized. Cohort 2 (87 pts ): Pts were stratified (prior trastuzumab) and randomized 5:5:2 to receive L 1500 mg + placebo or L 1000 mg + P 400 mg (double-blind) or P 800 mg (open-label), respectively, QD. Treatment continued until PD, unacceptable toxicity or death. Primary endpoint was ORR. Secondary endpoints included PFS, OS, and safety. Results: Cohort 1: 76 pts were randomized and treated: L, n=38; L+P, n=38. ORR was 29% for the L arm, and 45% for the L+P arm. Median PFS was 16.1 and 14.3 wks, respectively, for the L and L+P arms. The most frequent Grade ≥3 AEs were diarrhea (0% vs 18%) vomiting (0% vs 8%), ALT increased (0% vs 8%), neutropenia (3% vs 13%), and bilirubin increased (0% vs 5%). Dose reductions due to AE were 3% and 21% and dose interruptions due to AE were 11% and 55% in the L and L+P arms, respectively. Cohort 2: 88 pts were randomized (87 treated): L, n=36; P, n=14; L+P, n=38. The ORR was 47%, 31%, and 58% for the L, P, and L+P arms, respectively. Median PFS was 16.0, 11.4, and 16.0 wks for the L, P, and L+P arms, respectively. The most frequent Grade ≥3 AEs were ALT increased (0%, 0%, 21%), AST increased (0%, 0%, 18%), diarrhea (3%, 8%, 8%), and fatigue (3%, 8%, 8%). Dose reductions due to AE occurred in 0%, 0%, and 13% of pts and dose interruptions due to AE occurred in 22%, 23%, and 39% of pts in the L, P, and L+P arms, respectively. Conclusions: This prospective, randomized study confirmed the clinical activity of lapatinib single agent in metastatic ErbB2+ IBC. Furthermore, we demonstrated increased toxicity associated with the combination without a clinically meaningful improvement in efficacy.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207