MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and patient-centered outcomes with maintenance olaparib compared with placebo following chemotherapy in patients with germline (g) BRCA-mutated (m) platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer (PSR SOC): SOLO2 phase III trial.

2017· article· en· W2762521795 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Friedländer, Val Gebski, Emma Gibbs, Ralph Bloomfield, Felix Hilpert, Lari Wenzel, Florence Joly, Daniel Eek, Manuel Rodrigues, Andrew R. Clamp, Richard T. Penson, Diane Provencher, Jacob Korach, Tomasz Huzarski, Laura Vidal, Vanda Salutari, Clare L. Scott, Maria Ornella Nicoletto, Kenji Tamura, Éric Pujade-Lauraine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioPlaceboOlaparibQuality of life (healthcare)Ovarian cancerOncologyAdverse effectChemotherapyClinical endpointCancerClinical trialConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5507 Background: The median PFS after chemotherapy in PSR SOC is less than 6 months in many patients. In SOLO2 (ENGOT Ov-21; NCT01874353), maintenance olaparib (O) given after response to chemotherapy resulted in a significant improvement in PFS vs placebo (P) in patients with g BRCAm PSR SOC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.30, 95% CI 0.22, 0.41; P<0.0001; median 19.1 vs 5.5 months; 63% data maturity; Pujade-Lauraine et al. SGO 2017). Our a priori hypothesis was that maintenance therapy with O would not negatively impact HRQOL compared with P and would be associated with additional patient-centered benefits to support the prolongation of PFS, the primary endpoint of SOLO2. Methods: HRQOL was evaluated by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian Trial Outcome Index (FACT-O TOI) in all 295 patients. This measures functional and physical well-being and symptoms, including adverse events. Change from baseline in FACT-O TOI score during the first 12 months was the primary HRQOL analysis (mixed model repeated measures). Secondary planned analyses included duration of ‘good quality of life’ by time without symptoms of disease or toxicity (TWiST) and quality-adjusted PFS (QAPFS; a single measure of PFS and HRQOL outcomes). Results: There was no significant detrimental effect of O vs P on HRQOL analyzed by change from baseline in TOI score (–3.1 vs –2.9, respectively, difference (O minus P) –0.2; 95% CI –2.4, 2.1; P=0.88). There was a significant improvement for patients on maintenance O in TWiST (13.5 vs 7.2 months, difference 6.3; 95% CI 2.9, 8.6; P<0.001) and QAPFS (mean 14.0 vs 7.3 months for O and P, respectively, difference 6.7; 95% CI 5.0, 8.5; P<0.0001). Conclusions: Maintenance O did not detrimentally impact HRQOL relative to P. The significant improvement in PFS with O was associated with additional patient-centered benefits, including a longer duration without symptoms of disease or treatment toxicity and longer QAPFS. Clinical trial information: NCT01874353.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations18
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBRCA gene mutations in cancer→French-language works237,207→