MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract OT3-05-02: BYLieve: A phase 2 study of alpelisib with fulvestrant or letrozole for treatment of <i>PIK3CA</i> mutant, hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2<i>–</i>) advanced breast cancer (aBC) progressing on/after cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitor therapy

2018· article· en· W2790385254 on OpenAlexaff
HS Rugo, Nicholas C. Turner, Sin Eng Chia, Eva Ciruelos, Carolyn C. Nienstedt, Antonia Ridolfi, O Kong, B. Sankaran, Dejan Juric

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFulvestrantLetrozoleMedicineAromatase inhibitorInternal medicineOncologyCancerMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerEstrogen receptorAromatase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Endocrine therapy (ET) is the standard of care for treatment of HR+, HER2– aBC. However, ET resistance occurs frequently leading to disease progression. Dysregulation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, specifically mutations in PIK3CA, the gene encoding the p110alpha subunit of PI3K, has been implicated in ET resistance. In a phase 1 study, alpelisib, a PI3Kα-specific inhibitor, in combination with fulvestrant has shown antitumor activity in patients with PIK3CA mutant, HR+, HER2– aBC. The present BYLieve (NCT03056755) study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of alpelisib + fulvestrant/letrozole in PIK3CA-mutant, HR+, HER2– aBC progressing on/after prior CDK4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i) therapy. Methods: BYLieve is a phase 2, multicenter, open-label, 2-cohort, non-comparative study. Men and postmenopausal women (≥ 18 years) with PIK3CA-mutant, HR+, HER2− locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer that has progressed on/after prior CDK4/6i therapy are eligible. Other eligibility criteria include ≥ 1 measurable lesion (RECIST v1.1) or predominantly lytic bone lesion; ECOG PS ≤ 2; and no prior PI3K inhibitor therapy. Patients are allocated to 2 cohorts based on the prior ET partner (aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant) used in combination with CDK4/6i. Cohort A (patients who had received CDK4/6i + AI): oral alpelisib (300 mg once daily) + intramuscular fulvestrant (500 mg on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1, and day 1 of cycles ≥ 2 [28-day cycles]) and cohort B (patients who had received CDK4/6i + fulvestrant): oral alpelisib (300 mg once daily) + oral letrozole (2.5 mg once daily). Study treatment will continue until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary end point is the proportion of patients who are alive without disease progression at 6 months (RECIST v1.1; local assessment), which will be evaluated separately in each cohort and presented together with 2-sided 90% confidence intervals using Clopper and Pearson (1934) exact method. Evidence of treatment effect will be demonstrated if the lower bound of the 90% CI is greater than 30%. A total sample size of 80 patients in each cohort is planned. Secondary end points include progression-free survival (PFS), PFS on next-line treatment (PFS2), overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, duration of response, safety, and tolerability. Detection of frequency of PIK3CA mutations in ctDNA and its correlation with response is an exploratory end point. Citation Format: Rugo HS, Turner N, Chia S, Ciruelos E, Nienstedt C, Ridolfi A, Kong O, Sankaran B, Juric D. BYLieve: A phase 2 study of alpelisib with fulvestrant or letrozole for treatment of PIK3CA mutant, hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (aBC) progressing on/after cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitor therapy [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-05-02.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207