Phase III trial of dovitinib (TKI258) versus sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma after failure of anti-angiogenic (VEGF-targeted and mTOR inhibitor) therapies.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS4683 Background: Standard first- and second-line treatments in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) target the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling pathways. However, signaling through other pathways, including the fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) pathway, may account for tumor resistance to these standard therapies. Dovitinib (TKI258) is an oral FGF, VEGF, and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with IC50 values of ≈ 10 nM. In a phase II study of 59 RCC patients, many of whom had failed prior VEGF-targeted and mTOR inhibitor therapies, dovitinib (500 mg/day on a 5-days-on/2-days-off schedule) was well tolerated and demonstrated promising anti-tumor effects, with progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.5 months (Angevin et al, ASCO 2011). Methods: Approximately 550 patients from over 26 countries will be randomized 1:1 in this multicenter, open-label, randomized phase III trial (NCT01223027) to receive dovitinib (500 mg/day on a 5-days-on/2-days-off schedule) or sorafenib (400 mg twice daily). Eligible mRCC patients must have failed 1 VEGF-targeted therapy and 1 mTOR inhibitor (disease progression on or within 6 months of stopping the prior treatment). Patients will remain on study until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, or discontinuation for any other reason. No treatment crossover is planned. The primary endpoint is PFS as determined by central radiology assessment according to RECIST v1.1, with evaluations performed every 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, overall response rate, safety, patient-reported outcomes, and pharmacokinetics. The pharmacodynamic effects of dovitinib on plasma/serum biomarkers will also be explored. The data monitoring committee last reviewed the trial on 20 December 2011 and recommended that the trial continue as planned. This is the first third-line randomized clinical trial in mRCC to evaluate a multitargeted inhibitor of FGFR.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".