MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

NCIC CTG IND.206: A phase II umbrella trial of sunitinib (S) or temsirolimus (T) in advanced rare cancers.

2015· article· en· W2921472048 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janet Dancey, Monika K. Krzyzanowska, Diane Provencher, Winson Y. Cheung, Robyn Jane Macfarlane, Thierry Alcindor, Prafull Ghatage, Abha A. Gupta, Scott A. Laurie, Michael B. Sawyer, Stephen Welch, Muhammad Salim, Susan Ellard, Donna A. Wall, Ming‐Sound Tsao, Joana Sederias, Hao Xu, Torsten O. Nielsen, L. Sylvia, Hal W. Hirte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsJuravinski Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkOttawa HospitalCancerCare ManitobaHospital for Sick ChildrenBaker Hughes (Canada)McGill University Health CentreQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreInterior HealthBC Cancer AgencyPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSunitinibTemsirolimusInternal medicineCohortOncologyClinical trialCancerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2594 Background: Patients (Pts) with rare cancers have few treatment options due to the challenges of conducting clinical trials when projected accrual is low. However, rare cancers may have driver mutations that can be targeted with potentially dramatic therapeutic effects. Methods: IND.206 is a multi-center, non-randomized phase II study of S or T in 11 rare tumor cohorts ( < 100 eligible patients/year in Canada). Cohorts: 8 histologic, 2 genetic, 1 exploratory unspecified. Pts received S (50 mg PO daily x 28 days, q 6 weeks) or T (25 mg IV weekly, q 6 weeks). Each cohort and drug was evaluated separately using a 2 stage design targeting 5 versus 25% RECIST response rate. Blood and tumor were collected for genomic analyses. For trial efficiency, 1) pts could be re-entered to the alternate drug at progression; 2) data collection and SAE reporting were streamlined; 3) cohorts could be stopped early for activity, inactivity or failure to accrue. Central pathology review was performed. Results: The trial was activated in 7/2011. To date, 134 patients were enrolled, 156 registered (22 pts crossed over). 132 are evaluable for response, 134 are evaluable for toxicity. 4 cohorts failed meet the minimum accrual. Only the medullary thyroid cohort treated with S met the protocol defined activity level. Responses were seen in the following: medullary thyroid carcinoma (7/16 on S), clear cell carcinomas of ovary/endometrium (3/22 S; 3/22 T), pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas (1/4 S), 1 extraskeletal myxoid chondrosarcoma (ESMCS) on S, 1 perivascular epithelioid cell tumor on T. Responses were not seen in vascular sarcomas (n = 16 10 S, 6 T) Ewing’s sarcoma family tumours (n = 10, T), adrenocortical (n = 12 S, 10 T) or thymic carcinomas (n = 5 S, 2 T) despite case reports in the literature. Toxicity was consistent with previously studies although quantity of grade 1-2 and expedited reports were reduced as per protocol. Genomic studies are underway. Conclusions: S and T induce responses in clear cell carcinomas of ovary and endometrium, medullary carcinoma of thyroid, paraganglioma and ESMCS. Case reports in the literature may overestimate activity. Our umbrella design is efficient for evaluating drug activity in rare cancers. Clinical trial information: NCT01396408.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.331
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207