MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prognostic and predictive effects of <i>TP53</i> mutation in patients with <i>EGFR</i>-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2016· article· en· W2890760483 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Labbé, Grzegorz Korpanty, Pascale Tomasini, Mark Doherty, Céline Mascaux, Kevin Jao, Bethany Pitcher, Melania Pintilie, Natasha B. Leighl, Ronald Feld, Geoffrey Liu, Penelope Ann Bradbury, Suzanne Kamel‐Reid, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Frances A. Shepherd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLung cancerStage (stratigraphy)OncologyDemographicsCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

11585 Background: TP53 mutations are common in NSCLC; they occur frequently with other driver mutations, and have been reported as prognostic of poor outcome. The impact of TP53 mutations in EGFR-mutated NSCLC is unclear. Methods: Tissue from 73 patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre were analyzed by next-generation sequencing. TP53status was correlated with baseline demographics (sex, ethnicity, age, stage, CNS mets, smoking history, treatment) and outcomes (response [ORR], progression-free [PFS] and overall survival [OS]). Results: Dual TP53/EGFR mutations were found in 31 patients (42%), and were associated with younger age (median 53 v 64 y, p < 0.001). There were more patients with multiple EGFR mutations in the TP53 WT group (19% vs 0%) and more exon 19 deletions in TP53 mut group (68% vs 52%, p = 0.047). OS for all 73 patients was influenced by stage at diagnosis (HR 2.91 stage III, 4.27 stage IV, v I-II) and TP53 mut (HR 2.05, CI 1.02-4.12, p = 0.04). Only 59 patients (26 TP53 mut; 33 TP53 WT) received EGFR TKIs. ORR was not significantly different for TP53 WT v mut (64% v 54%, p = 0.62). In univariable analysis, non-Caucasian ethnicity (HR 0.47, CI 0.25-0.88, p = 0.02) and dual TP53/EGFR mut (HR 1.91, CI 1.04-3.49, p = 0.04) were associated with significant differences in PFS on EGFR TKIs, but not in multivariable analysis. Among 38 patients (19 in each group) treated with chemotherapy, ORR was not influenced by TP53 status. Among 12 patients tested, 4 (80%) TP53 WT and 3 (43%) TP53 mut had T790M mutations. All 6 patients treated with T790M inhibitors (2 TP53 mut; 4 TP53 WT) achieved partial response. There was a non-significant trend for more brain metastases with dual TP53/EGFR mut (58% v 37% at 5 years, p = 0.10); when excluding patients with brain metastases at diagnosis, time to brain metastases was significantly shorter in patients with dual TP53/EGFRmut (HR 2.2, CI 1.07-4.54, p = 0.03). Conclusions: In patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC, TP53 mutation negatively impacts OS and PFS on EGFR TKIs, and may be associated with brain metastases. Larger datasets are required to validate whether TP53 mutational status is an independent factor predictive of differential benefit from EGFR TKIs.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207