MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A TITE-CRM phase I/II study of disulfiram and copper with concurrent radiation therapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

2019· article· en· W2947989730 on OpenAlexaff
Jiayi Huang, T.A. DeWees, Jian Campian, Milan G. Chheda, George Ansstas, Christina Tsien, Gregory J. Zipfel, Gavin P. Dunn, Jospeh E Ippolito, J. Gregory Cairncross, Jacob C. Easaw, Josh Rubin, Albert H. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBaker Hughes (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTemozolomideDisulfiramInternal medicineRadiation therapyGlioblastomaToxicityPhases of clinical researchOncologyAdjuvantUrologyNuclear medicineSurgeryGastroenterologyPharmacologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2033 Background: Disulfiram (DSF) has shown promising activity against glioblastoma in preclinical studies and is more effective when combined with copper (Cu). Our previous phase I study established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of DSF when combined with adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ). This phase I/II study aims to establish the MTD when disulfiram and copper are combined with concurrent radiation therapy (RT) and TMZ for newly diagnosed glioblastoma and to explore preliminary efficacy. Methods: Eligible patients were treated with standard RT and TMZ plus escalating doses of DSF (250 mg - 375 mg PO QD) and Cu (2 mg PO TID), followed by adjuvant TMZ plus DSF (500 mg/day) and Cu. The time-to-event continual reassessment method (TITE-CRM) was used to continuously estimate the probability of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and to assign patients to doses with an estimated DLT probability of approximately 20% with a margin of 5%. Tumor mutations were evaluated with next-generation sequencing for all patients. Results: Eighteen glioblastoma patients were treated with the study therapy: 8 with DSF of 250 mg/day and 10 with 375 mg/day. Three DLTs were observed: 1 with 250 mg/day (grade 2 urinary incontinence and ataxia), and 2 with 375 mg/day (both grade 3 elevated liver enzymes). DSF had an estimated DLT probability of 10% (95% CI: 3-29%) at 250 mg/day, and 21% (95% CI: 7-42%) at 375 mg/day. After a median follow-up of 12.3 months, 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 57%, and 1-year overall survival (OS) was 69%. There was no significant difference in PFS/OS when stratified by DSF doses, surgical extent, or MGMT methylation status. However, glioblastomas with IDH1 (n = 6), BRAF (n = 2), or NF1 (n = 1) mutations had significantly better PFS and OS than those without the mutations: 1-year PFS: 100% vs 22%, respectively, p = 0.001; 1-year OS: 100% vs 42%, respectively, p = 0.006. Conclusions: The MTD of DSF with RT/TMZ/Cu for glioblastoma is 375 mg/day, and the recommended phase II dose is 250 mg/day. Although confirmation with larger sample size is needed, the combination demonstrates promising preliminary efficacy for the subset of glioblastoma with IDH1, BRAF, and NF1 mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT02715609.

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)0.002
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→