Escalated dose somatostatin analogues (SSAs) in management of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs): A systematic review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
422 Background: SSAs are effective in controlling NET symptoms and more recently have been shown to have anti-proliferative properties. PROMID and CLARINET have established “standard” doses of octreotide and lanreotide, but dose escalation is often employed both for symptom relief and tumor control. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and abstracts of major conferences. Studies investigating patients treated with doses of octreotide higher than 30mg/28d or lanreotide higher than 120mg/28d were eligible for inclusion. Data extracted included patient population, interventions and prior SSA use. The primary endpoint was disease control rate; secondary endpoints included response rate, symptom control, biochemical response, progression-free survival and toxicity. Results: 19 studies (12 prospective; 981 patients) were identified from 609 search results. Of the 13 studies that mandated prior treatment, the reasons for dose escalation were tumor progression (5), symptoms (3), either (2) and not listed (3). SSAs used were octreotide LAR (10), lanreotide ATG (1), short-acting octreotide (3), short-acting lanreotide (3), and mixtures (2). Significant heterogeneity existed in dosing schedules as well as reporting of efficacy data. Disease control rates ranged from 40-100% (pooled rate 248/396) with response rates from 0-42% (pooled rate 24/396). Dose escalation was associated with improvement in carcinoid symptoms in at least 50% of patients. Biochemical response was variably defined but reported rates ranged from 33% to 100% (pooled rate 55/78). Median PFS ranged from 6 months to 30 months. Dose escalation was generally well tolerated with side effect profile and frequency comparable to normal dose SSA. Conclusions: Escalated dose SSA is well tolerated and results in significant rates of disease control and symptomatic improvement. Compared to a prior systematic review (Broder WJG 2015), this review includes studies of lanreotide, includes 721 additional patients, and restricts inclusion to clinical studies. Prospective randomized trials of escalated SSA therapy are warranted.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".