MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2897022880 · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdy286.002

Copanlisib monotherapy activity in relapsed or refractory indolent B-cell lymphoma: Combined analysis from phase I and II studies

2018· article· en· W2897022880 on OpenAlexaff
Pier Luigi Zinzani, Armando Santoro, Luigina Mollica, George Follows, Krimo Bouabdallah, Franck Morschhauser, Amita Patnaik, Liping Huang, Florian Hiemeyer, Alice Benson, Isabelle Genvresse, J. Garcia‐Vargas, Barrett H. Childs, Martin Dreyling

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersJanssen Research and DevelopmentBayer
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineAdverse effectNauseaPhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyLymphomaCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse EventsPneumonitisClinical endpointTolerabilityFollicular lymphomaRefractory (planetary science)RituximabBendamustineSurgeryChemotherapyClinical trialLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Copanlisib, a pan-class I phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor with potent PI3K-α and PI3K-δ activity, has been explored as monotherapy in four phase I or II studies in patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) indolent B-cell lymphoma having progressed on two or more prior lines of therapy. Because of similar entry criteria for all four studies, we therefore conducted a combined safety and efficacy analysis.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Oncology→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→