MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A phase IV study using multi-omics to identify mechanisms of response and resistance to crizotinib in ALK+ advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with distinct progression free survival outcomes.

2017· article· en· W2891282311 on OpenAlexaff
Mathilde Couëtoux du Tertre, Lise Tremblay, Nicole Bouchard, Razvan Diaconescu, Normand Blais, Errol Camlioglu, André Constantin, Cyrla Hoffert, Karen Gambaro, Archana Srivastava, Celia M.T. Greenwood, Christian Couture, Suzan McNamara, Gerald Batist, Victor Cohen, Jason Agulnik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General HospitalHôpital Notre-DameHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalMcGill University Health CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrizotinibMedicineLung cancerOncologyInternal medicineResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsALK inhibitorProgression-free survivalAdenocarcinomaCancerChemotherapyProgressive disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e20588 Background: Crizotinib is the current first-line standard of care for ALK+ NSCLC with response rates reaching 65% [1] . However, most patients progress within 1 or 2 years and mechanisms of resistance remain unknown for approximately 30% of patients [2] . [1] Shaw et al. Crizotinib versus chemotherapy in advanced ALK-positive lung cancer. NEJM 368: 2385-2394, 2013. [2] Doebele et al. Mechanisms of resistance to crizotinib in patients with ALK gene rearranged non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18:1472-1482 Methods: Eligible patients had locally advanced or metastatic ALK+ NSCLC. Patients were asked to undergo a repeat tumor biopsy at time of progression and serial bloods and archived primary tumor were collected. Responses were assessed by RECIST 1.1. ctDNA and protein expression on serial blood will be evaluated over the course of treatment. Tumors were profiled using exome sequencing and targeted genomic analysis to identify novel mutations associated with response. Results: 24 patients with stage IV adenocarcinoma received crizotinib as first-line (n = 22) and second-line (n = 2) treatment. Mean age was 60 y (range 41-80). 4% were smokers, 33.5% were former and 62.5% were never-smokers. At data cutoff (Jan 26, 2017), 16 patients have discontinued treatment (14 due to progression and 2 withdrew). The median PFS markedly differed in non-responders (patients with immediate progression) vs responders (patients with initial response or stable disease) (1.8 vs. 27 months). Profiling was performed to identify the genomic traits in tissue and blood that correlate to treatment response. Conclusions: We identified a previously unrecognized subset of patients treated with crizotinib with an exceptionally long PFS. We also observed a subset of patients intrinsically resistant to crizotinib despite harboring ALK+. There are no known predictive biomarkers which can identify patients that will have a long-lasting response or who may not derive benefit from crizotinib. The multi-omics profiling applied to these groups may provide novel insights into mechanisms of response and resistance to crizotinib. Clinical trial information: NCT02041468.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.452 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations→French-language works237,207→