MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PALOMA-2: Primary results from a phase III trial of palbociclib (P) with letrozole (L) compared with letrozole alone in postmenopausal women with ER+/HER2– advanced breast cancer (ABC).

2016· article· en· W2702886506 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePalbociclibLetrozoleClinical endpointInternal medicineHazard ratioBreast cancerCancerProgression-free survivalAdverse effectOncologyGynecologyRandomized controlled trialMetastatic breast cancerConfidence intervalTamoxifenOverall survival

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

507 Background: Hormonal therapy (HT) is the mainstay for patients (pts) with ER+ BC. P, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, blocks growth of ER+/HER2– BC preclinical models. In PALOMA-1, an open-label Ph 2 trial, addition of P to L improved median PFS vs L alone (20.2 months [mo] vs 10.2 mo) in pts with first-line ER+/HER2– ABC with acceptable safety, leading to accelerated FDA approval. PALOMA-2 is a randomized double-blind Ph 3 trial designed to confirm these results. Methods: 666 postmenopausal pts with no prior systemic therapy for ABC were randomized 2:1 to receive P (oral 125 mg/d; 3 wks on/1 wk off) + L (2.5 mg/d continuously) or PLB + L every 28 days until disease progression, consent withdrawal or death. Pts were stratified by disease site, disease-free interval from end of (neo)adjuvant therapy, and prior HT (yes/no). Primary endpoint: investigator-assessed PFS; key secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR=CR + PR + SD ≥24 wks), patient-reported outcomes and safety. Tumor assessments were every 12 wks. 347 events were needed with 90% power to detect a hazard ratio (HR) ≤0.69 in favor of P+L (1-sided α=0.025). Results: By 26 Feb 2016, 331 PFS events occurred. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Median PFS was 24.8 mo (P+L) vs 14.5 mo (PLB+L) (HR=0.58 [0.46–0.72], P<0.000001). ORR was improved with P+L (42.1% vs 34.7%, P=0.031; 55.3% vs 44.4% in pts with measurable disease [P=0.013]). CBR was 84.9% vs 70.3% (P<.0001). Common adverse events (AEs; all grades) with P+L vs PLB+L were neutropenia (79.5% vs 6.3%), fatigue (37.4% vs 27.5%), nausea (35.1% vs 26.1%), arthralgia (33.3% vs 33.8%) and alopecia (32.9% vs 15.8%). Most common severity seen was G3 for neutropenia (56.1%) and G1 for the other AEs. Febrile neutropenia was seen only with P+L (2.5%). Permanent discontinuation due to AEs was 9.7% (P+L) vs 5.9% (PLB+L). OS data are immature; final OS analysis is pending. Conclusion: PALOMA-2 expands and confirms the significant clinical benefit and safety of P+L in ER+/HER2– ABC pts who had not received prior systemic therapy for their advanced disease. Clinical trial information: NCT01740427.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.361 · 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