MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

MGCD265, a multitargeted oral tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitor of Met and VEGFR, in combination with erlotinib in patients with advanced solid tumors.

2012· article· en· W2604245147 on OpenAlexaff
Peter J. O’Dwyer, Kyriakos P. Papadopoulos, Anthony W. Tolcher, Ursina Teitelbaum, K. Harlacker, Lon Smith, Davendra Sohal, Drew Rasco, Muralidhar Beeram, Mariam Mehran, Manal Tawashi, Michel Drouin, James Wang, Marielle Fournel, Christiane R. Maroun, Andre Karam, Jeffrey M. Besterman, Amita Patnaik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsPyrogenesis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErlotinibMedicineRashAdverse effectInternal medicinePharmacodynamicsPharmacologyPharmacokineticsTyrosine-kinase inhibitorGastroenterologyOncologyEpidermal growth factor receptorCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e13602 Background: MGCD265 is a multi-target oral tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitor that targets Met (wild type and clinically-relevant Met mutants), VEGFRs 1, 2, 3, Tie and Ron. Combining Met and EGFR inhibitors has been shown to be synergistic and can overcome resistance to EGFR inhibitors. MGCD265 in combination with erlotinib is being evaluated clinically for safety and efficacy. Methods: This is a phase I dose escalation trial of patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors, using the classic 3+3 design. MGCD265 and erlotinib were administered every day over a 21-day cycle. Safety evaluation included determination of dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose of the combination. The pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles as well as anti-tumor activity, using RECIST 1.1, were also evaluated. Results: As ofJanuary 11, 2012, 45 pts were enrolled (median age: 58 years old; M/F: 27/18; ECOG 0/1: 20/25). MGCD265 was dose escalated from 96 mg/m2 QD to 162 mg/m2 BID, in combination with erlotinib (initially at 100 mg then at 150 mg QD). Diarrhea (n=6) was the only treatment-related ≥ grade 3 adverse event observed in ≥ 2 pts. The observed DLTs (all grade 3) were (n=1): diarrhea (96 mg/m2 QD MGCD265+100 mg erlotinib), rash and fatigue (144 mg/m2 QD MGCD265+150 mg erlotinib) and rhabdomyolysis (162 mg/m2 BID MGCD265+150 mg erlotinib). One out of 3 pts with NSCLC, who was positive for activating EGFR mutation, experienced a partial response (duration of response of 8 cycles). Seven pts with a variety of tumors experienced stable disease for 6 cycles or more. Three out of 8 pts with gastroesophageal cancer remained on study for ~12-26 cycles. The PD profile indicated a decrease in the plasma level of HGF at Cycle 1 Day 8 compared to baseline in some patients. Conclusions: MGCD265, at the doses tested, was well tolerated in combination with full-dose erlotinib. The activity of MGCD265 combined with erlotinib supports phase II development of the combination.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism→French-language works237,207→