Phase II study of individualized sunitinib (SUN) as first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
4514 Background: Higher SUN exposure is associated with better outcomes. Patients (pts) with minimum toxicity on the standard schedule do worse than pts needing dosing changes for toxicity. Methods: It was hypothesized that toxicity-driven dose/schedule individualization would improve the primary endpoint (PFS) from 8.5 (EFFECT trial) to 14 months (mo), with 99 pts required to detect this with 90% power and 2-sided alpha = 0.05. In a prospective phase II study (eligibility as EFFECT) pts start on 50 mg/day (d) for 28 d with treatment (Rx) breaks reduced to 7 d. If grade-2 toxicity develops before d 28, pts stay on a 50 mg on the next cycle with the number of d on Rx individualized aiming for ≤ grade-2 toxicity. Dose is reduced to 37.5 mg and then 25 mg if pts do not tolerate a 50 mg or 37.5 mg dose respectively for at least 7 d. Pts with minimum toxicity on d 28 are escalated to 62.5 mg and then 75 mg. Results: 117 pts were enrolled in 12 centers. Nine non-evaluable pts came off early due to toxicity (5), non-compliance (2) and global deterioration (2). Of 108 pts evaluable for response (IMDC favorable 31.5%, intermediate 58.3%, poor 10.2%. Bone mets 19%, Nephrect 83%), 10 are still on Rx. Dose was escalated in 20 pts (18.5%) to 62.5 mg (12 pts) and then to 75 mg (8 pts). In 49 pts (45.4%) eligible for dose reduction by standard criteria, a 50 mg dose was maintained but for 7 - 24 d, while 7 pts (6.5%) stayed on a 28 d schedule. Dose was reduced to 37.5 mg in 22 pts (20.4% vs. 36 - 63% in 4 large SUN trials) and to 25 mg in 10 pts (9.3% vs. 27 - 43% in 4 trials). Rx was stopped due to toxicity in 10/117 pts (9.3% vs. 15 - 19% in 4 trials). See table for response (ORR, 108 pts) and survival (117 pts) data vs. EFFECT (146 pts). The median followup is 15.5 mo (0.6 -37.9) for PFS and 24.5 mo (4.4 - 47.7) for OS. Conclusions: The null hypothesis of the PFS being 8.5 mo can be rejected with a p < 0.001. Individualized dosing is safe and feasible in a multicenter setting and associated with improved dose intensity and one of the best ORR, PFS and OS reported for a TKI. Clinical trial information: NCT01499121. [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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".