NUC-1031 in combination with cisplatin for first-line treatment of advanced biliary tract cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS4156 Background: Cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) is the global standard of care for 1st-line treatment of patients (pts) with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). No agents have regulatory approval for this disease. CisGem achieves an objective response rate (ORR) of 26% and median overall survival (OS) of 11.7 months (ABC-02). Key cancer resistance mechanisms limit gemcitabine efficacy. NUC-1031, a phosphoramidate transformation of gemcitabine, is designed to overcome resistance mechanisms associated with poor gemcitabine response. Promising signs of efficacy have been observed with single agent in a phase I study in solid tumors (Blagden et al 2018) and in the phase Ib ABC-08 study of NUC-1031 + cisplatin 25 mg /m2 d1, d8 q 21 days for the 1st-line treatment of advanced BTC. 14 pts have been enrolled across 2 cohorts (NUC-1031: 625 mg/m2 and 725 mg/m2). In 11 pts evaluable for response ORR was 64% (1 CR, 6 PRs) and DCR was 73%. PFS/OS data is maturing. The combination was very well-tolerated with no unexpected adverse events or dose-limiting toxicities. The RP2D in combination with cisplatin is 725 mg/ m2. Safety, coupled with encouraging efficacy signal has led to initiation of a global Phase III development program. Methods: A Phase III, open-label, randomized head-to-head study of NUC-1031 + cisplatin versus CisGem for the 1st-line treatment of advanced BTC will include pts ≥18 years with histologically- or cytologically-proven BTC (including cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder, or ampullary cancer), that is not resectable and who have had no prior systemic chemotherapy for locally advanced/metastatic disease. A total of 828 pts will be randomized (1:1) to either 725 mg/m2 NUC-1031 + 25 mg/m2 cisplatin or 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine + 25 mg/m2 cisplatin, administered on Days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle, respectively. Primary objectives are OS and ORR. Secondary objectives include further measurements of efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and patient-reported quality of life. The study will be conducted at approximately 120 sites across North America, Europe and Asia Pacific countries. Clinical trial information: NCT02351765.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".