MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Safety and efficacy of lanreotide depot/autogel (LAN) in patients with lung NETs: The randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled phase III SPINET study.

2016· article· en· W2891163403 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diane Reidy‐Lagunes, Matthew H. Kulke, Edward M. Wolin, Simron Singh, Diego Ferone, Beloo Mirakhur, Christine Massien, Aude Houchard, Martyn Caplin, Éric Baudin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLanreotideClinical endpointInternal medicineRandomizationPlaceboPerformance statusRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologyOncologySurgeryChemotherapyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS8580 Background: In the CLARINET study (NCT00353496), LAN was associated with significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) of grade 1 or 2 (Ki-67 < 10%). Limited options are available for the treatment of patients with advanced lung NETs. The aim of the SPINET study is to evaluate the safety and antitumor efficacy of LAN 120 mg vs. PBO in these patients. Methods: SPINET is an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled phase III study. Main inclusion criteria: adult patients with well-differentiated typical or atypical, metastatic and/or unresectable lung NETs, positive somatostatin-receptor imaging ( ≥ grade 2 Krenning scale), ≤ 1 course of chemotherapy, ECOG PS 0-1. A total of 216 patients will be enrolled from 80 sites across the USA, Canada, and Europe. Patients will be randomized 2:1 to receive either LAN (120 mg every 28 days) + best supportive care (BSC) or PBO + BSC, until progressive disease (PD)/death or unacceptable toxicity. Patients receiving PBO who experience PD may opt to receive LAN 120 mg in an open-label extension phase. All patients who experience PD will be followed to document survival, quality of life (QoL), and subsequent anticancer treatments. The primary endpoint, PFS (time from randomization to progressive disease [PD]/death), will be assessed based on central review using RECIST v1.1. Main secondary endpoints include PFS according to local review, objective response rates, overall survival, changes in plasma chromogranin (CgA) levels, LAN pharmacokinetics, QoL, and safety. This trial is active and registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT:2015-004992-62). Clinical trial information: 2015-004992-62.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.398 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances→French-language works237,207→