MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624841205 · doi:10.1200/jco.2016.71.7454

Carboplatin and Etoposide With or Without Palifosfamide in Untreated Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Multicenter, Adaptive, Randomized Phase III Study (MATISSE)

2017· article· en· W2624841205 on OpenAlexaff
Shadia I. Jalal, Philip T. Lavin, Gregory Lo, François Lebel, Lawrence H. Einhorn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsLakeridge Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarboplatinEtoposideClinical endpointLung cancerPhases of clinical researchInternal medicineAdverse effectChemotherapyRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologySurgeryCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of the addition of palifosfamide to carboplatin and etoposide in extensive stage (ES) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients and Methods MATISSE was a randomized, open-label, adaptive phase III study. Previously untreated patients with ES SCLC were randomly assigned in a 1:1 fashion to receive carboplatin at area under the serum concentration-time curve 5 on day 1 plus etoposide 100 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 to 3 every 21 days (CE) or carboplatin at area under the serum concentration-time curve 4 on day 1 plus etoposide 100 mg/m 2 per day plus palifosfamide 130 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 to 3 every 21 days (PaCE). The primary end point was overall survival. Results In all, 188 patients were enrolled; 94 patients received CE and 94 patients received PaCE. The median age on both arms was 61 years. Six cycles of chemotherapy were completed on both arms of the study by approximately 50% of the patients. Serious adverse events were documented and did not differ significantly between patients receiving PaCE and those receiving CE. Median overall survival was similar between both arms with 10.03 months on PaCE and 10.37 months on CE ( P = .096). Conclusion The addition of palifosfamide to CE failed to improve survival in ES SCLC.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207