MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946829725 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-18-3212

Pharmacodynamic and Clinical Results from a Phase I/II Study of the HSP90 Inhibitor Onalespib in Combination with Abiraterone Acetate in Prostate Cancer

2019· article· en· W2946829725 on OpenAlexaff
Susan F. Slovin, Syed A. Hussain, Fred Saad, Jorge García, Joel Picus, Roberta Ferraldeschi, Mateus Crespo, Penelope Flohr, Ruth Riisnaes, Chih‐Che Lin, Harold Keer, Aram Oganesian, Paul Workman, Johann S. de Bono

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCancer Research UKAstex Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsAbiraterone acetateProstate cancerPharmacodynamicsAbirateroneMedicineCancerProstateOncologyInternal medicinePharmacologyPharmacokineticsAndrogen deprivation therapyAndrogen receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Onalespib is a potent, fragment-derived second-generation HSP90 inhibitor with preclinical activity in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CPRC) models. This phase I/II trial evaluated onalespib in combination with abiraterone acetate (AA) and either prednisone or prednisolone (P) in men with CRPC progressing on AA/P. Patients and Methods: Patients with progressing CRPC were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 2 regimens of onalespib combined with AA/P. Onalespib was administered as intravenous infusion starting at 220 mg/m2 once weekly for 3 of 4 weeks (regimen 1); or at 120 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 2 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks (regimen 2). Primary endpoints were response rate and safety. Secondary endpoints included evaluation of androgen receptor (AR) depletion in circulating tumor cells (CTC) and in fresh tumor tissue biopsies. Results: Forty-eight patients were treated with onalespib in combination with AA/P. The most common ≥grade 3 toxicities related to onalespib included diarrhea (21%) and fatigue (13%). Diarrhea was dose limiting at 260 and 160 mg/m2 for regimens 1 and 2, respectively. Transient decreases in CTC counts and AR expression in CTC were observed in both regimens. HSP72 was significantly upregulated following onalespib treatment, but only a modest decrease in AR and GR was shown in paired pre- and posttreatment tumor biopsy samples. No patients showed an objective or PSA response. Conclusions: Onalespib in combination with AA/P showed mild evidence of some biological effect; however, this effect did not translate into clinical activity, hence further exploration of this combination was not justified.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207