MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Temsirolimus (TEM) maintenance therapy after response of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) to docetaxel (TAX).

2012· article· en· W2601829962 on OpenAlexaff
Urban Emmenegger, Christopher M. Booth, Scott R. Berry, Srikala S. Sridhar, Eric Winquist, Nesan Bandali, Annabelle Chow, Christina R. Lee, Ping Xu, Shan Man, Robert S. Kerbel, Yoo‐Joung Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreQueen's UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical endpointDocetaxelTemsirolimusProstate cancerInternal medicineOncologySurrogate endpointCancerUrologyClinical trialSurgeryPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayApoptosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e15177^ Background: There are no standard treatments for men who have demonstrated a good response to TAX without signs of progression. The mTOR pathway is involved in many aspects of CRPC, and mTOR inhibitors have shown significant anti-CRPC activity in preclinical testing. Therefore, we designed a phase II trial to explore whether maintenance therapy with TEM has the potential to prolong response to TAX without compromising quality of life. Methods: For this single-arm, multicenter phase II trial we recruited CRPC pts with documented treatment response by PSA (> 50% decline from baseline) or RECIST (1.0) criteria following ≥ 6 to 10 cycles of TAX (75 mg/m2 q3wks). Subjects received weekly TEM (25 mg iv x 4/cycle). The primary endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF; RECIST or symptomatic progression). Secondary endpoints included safety (NCI-CTCAE v3.0), quality of life (FACT-P, PPI), changes in PSA, objective tumor response rate, and overall survival. We were also studying surrogate markers of TEM activity, including the enumeration of circulating endothelial cells (CEC) as a potential indicator of the antiangiogenic effects of TEM. Results: 19 pts have been enrolled to data after a median of 7 cycles of TAX. The mean age was 68 years (range 51-82), and the median baseline PSA 17.3 (0.02-380.7). 15 pts had received prior local radiation therapy, 6 surgery. 17 pts had bone metastases, 9 visceral and 8 nodal disease. Pts received a median of 4 cycles of TEM (maximum 23 and continuing), resulting in a median TTF of 5.8 (95%CI 3.8-9.2) months. No PSA responses were seen (time to PSA progression 1.8 months), but 1 PR. 8 pts achieved SD. 12 pts have been discontinued due to treatment failure (RECIST [4], symptomatic [7], combined [1]), and 3 for other reasons, including TEM-associated toxicity (lymphedema [1]). TEM has been generally well tolerated without unexpected adverse events or negative impact on quality of life. The median overall survival has not yet been reached. There is a trend for TEM to reduce viable CEC amid large inter/intrapatient CEC variability. Conclusions: TEM maintenance therapy in CRPC pts that have responded to TAX appears to be well tolerated and results in meaningful prolonged TTF.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→