MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791154088 · doi:10.1038/s41375-018-0023-2

Ibrutinib versus temsirolimus: 3-year follow-up of patients with previously treated mantle cell lymphoma from the phase 3, international, randomized, open-label RAY study

2018· article· en· W2791154088 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Rule, Wojciech Jurczak, Mats Jerkeman, C. Rusconi, Marek Trněný, Fritz Offner, Dolores Caballero, Cristina João, Mathias Witzens‐Harig, Isabelle Bence‐Bruckler, Seok‐Goo Cho, Catherine Thiéblemont, Wangchi Zhou, Todd Henninger, Judith D. Goldberg, Jessica Vermeulen, Martin Dreyling

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersCelgenePfizer
KeywordsIbrutinibMantle cell lymphomaTemsirolimusMedicineLymphomaOpen labelInternal medicineOncologyPhases of clinical researchRandomized controlled trialClinical trialLeukemiaChemistryDiscovery and development of mTOR inhibitorsChronic lymphocytic leukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive B-cell malignancy with a reported median overall survival (OS) of 3–5 years [ 1 ]. Most patients relapse after first-line therapy and have a poor prognosis [ 1 ]. Regulatory approval of ibrutinib has provided a much needed therapeutic option for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) MCL [ 2 ], with ibrutinib becoming a preferred standard of care in current guidelines [ 3 , 4 ]. The randomized, open-label phase 3 RAY study (NCT01646021) was key in confirming the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib, with ibrutinib ( N = 139) showing significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus temsirolimus ( N = 141) (primary analysis [20-month follow-up]: 14.6 vs. 6.2 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32–0.58) [ 5 ]. Here, we report extended follow-up data from the final analysis of the RAY study.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations99
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeukemiaSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207