LATITUDE: A phase III, double-blind, randomized trial of androgen deprivation therapy with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone or placebos in newly diagnosed high-risk metastatic hormone-naive prostate cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LBA3 Background: Pts with newly diagnosed mHNPC, particularly with high-risk characteristics, have a poor prognosis. ADT+docetaxel showed improved outcomes in mHNPC, but many pts are not candidates for docetaxel and may benefit from alternative therapy. AA+P is indicated for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer pts. LATITUDE evaluates clinical benefit of early intervention with AA+P added to ADT in newly diagnosed, high-risk mHNPC pts. Methods: 1199 pts with newly diagnosed (≤ 3 mos prior to randomization) mHNPC (ECOG PS 0-2) with ≥ 2 of 3 risk factors (Gleason ≥ 8, ≥ 3 bone lesions, measurable visceral metastases) were randomized 1:1 to ADT+AA (1 g QD) + P (5 mg QD) or ADT+PBOs of AA and P. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS). One rPFS (~565 events), 2 interim, and 1 final OS analyses (~426, ~554, and ~852 events) were planned. Results: At this first interim analysis (median follow-up of 30.4 mos; 406 deaths [48%]; 593 rPFS events), OS, rPFS, and all secondary end points significantly favored ADT+AA+P (Table). The IDMC unanimously recommended unblinding the study and crossing pts to ADT+AA+P. Grade 3/4 adverse events (ADT+AA+P vs ADT+PBOs) (%): hypertension (20.3 vs 10.0); hypokalemia (10.4 vs 1.3); increased ALT (5.5 vs 1.3) or AST (4.4 vs 1.5). Conclusions: Early use of AA+P added to ADT in pts with high-risk mHNPC yielded significantly improved OS, rPFS, and all secondary end points vs ADT+PBOs alone. ADT+AA+P had a favorable risk/benefit ratio and supports early intervention with AA+P in newly diagnosed, high-risk mHNPC. Clinical trial information: NCT01715285. [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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".