MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A phase II trial of the effect of perindopril on hand foot syndrome (HFSR) incidence and severity in patients receiving regorafenib with refractory metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC).

2018· article· en· W2907451490 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Melosky, Howard J. Lim, Janine M. Davies, Sharlene Gill, Christian Kollmannsberger, Maria Ho, Solomon A. Vandt, Daniel J. Renouf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-related skin toxicity
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRegorafenibPerindoprilClinical endpointInterim analysisInternal medicineAdverse effectRefractory (planetary science)GastroenterologyColorectal cancerSurgeryOncologyClinical trialBlood pressureCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

824 Background: Regorafenib is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor (MKI), with a demonstrated overall survival benefit in mCRC refractory to standard therapy ( PMID 23177514). The most common grade 3 adverse event (AE) reported in this trial was HFSR, with 47% of patients (pts) experiencing HFSR of all grades, and 17% with grade 3 severity. The pathogenesis of regorafenib-induced HFSR is not well established, but may be related to alterations in the capillary endothelium. Perindopril is an Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE) Inhibitor indicated for the treatment of hypertension, and may also play a role in preventing endothelial dysfunction ( PMID 17140552). We hypothesized that perindopril may prevent or reduce the severity of regorafenib-induced HFSR. Methods: In this single center Phase II, open label trial, 34 pts with refractory mCRC were planned to be treated with regorafenib (160 mg/day) and perindopril (4 mg/day) with both agents given 3 weeks on and 1 week off. An interim analysis was planned after 10 evaluable pts. The primary objective was to assess the proportion of pts with any grade HSFR toxicity. Secondary endpoint included time to development of worst (grade 3) HSFR toxicity, proportion of all grades of hypertension and all grade toxicities, and progression free survival. All toxicities were evaluated using CTCAE v4.03. Results: 12 pts were accrued over a 9 month time period, and 10 pts were considered evaluable as they completed one cycle of treatment. Pt characteristics included (6 M/ 6F, mean age 62, ECOG PS 0 (25%)/ 1 (75%). A planned interim analysis was performed after 10 evaluable pts had completed their first cycle of study treatment. 5/10 (50%) experienced Grade 3 HFSR, and based on the statistical plan it was deemed highly unlikely that perindopril would lead to reduced levels of regorafenib induced HSFR compared with regorafenib alone thus enrolment was stopped. The most frequent other grade 3 toxicities included hypertension (16.7%), and increased AST (16.7%). Conclusions: The addition of perindopril to regorafenib did not appear to reduce HSFR incidence and severity in pts with refractory mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT02651415.

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)0.001
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicChemotherapy-related skin toxicityFrench-language works237,207