Biomarker (BM) evaluations in the phase III AVAglio study of bevacizumab (Bv) plus standard radiotherapy (RT) and temozolomide (T) for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2023^ Background: Bv plus 1st-line standard of care (SoC; T+RT) achieved a PFS benefit in the AVAglio phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo [P]-controlled trial in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed GBM. AVAglio includes BM evaluation to identify pts benefiting most from Bv. Analysis of plasma VEGF-A and VEGFR-2 was prioritized based on encouraging findings in Bv trials in several tumor types. Methods: AVAglio includes an optional, exploratory correlative BM analysis; participating pts provided informed consent for BMs. Baseline (BL) plasma samples were analyzed using the Roche IMPACT platform, based on multiplex ELISA technology. Pts were dichotomized according to BM levels using either Q1, median or Q3 cut-offs. Potential interactions between BL BM levels and PFS were tested using Cox regression analyses. Results: Of 921 patients enrolled, 571 (62%) were evaluable in the BM study. Baseline characteristics and PFS outcome were comparable in the ITT and BM-evaluable populations. Median BL VEGF-A and VEGFR-2 levels were 77.0 pg/mL and 12.6 ng/mL, respectively. No significant interaction for PFS was seen at α=0.025. Conclusions: The potential predictive (VEGF-A, VEGFR-2) and prognostic (VEGF-A) value seen in breast, pancreatic and gastric cancers was not apparent in BL BM samples from AVAglio using a median, Q1 or Q3 cut-off. Additional plasma and tumor BM analyses are ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT00943826. [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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".