ANNOUNCE: A randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled, double-blind, phase (Ph) III trial of doxorubicin (dox) + olaratumab versus dox + PBO in patients (pts) with advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STS).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LBA3 Background: Dox is standard therapy in STS. In a Ph 2 trial, olaratumab (a human IgG1 antibody targeting PDGFRα) + dox improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs dox. ANNOUNCE aimed to confirm the OS benefit in advanced STS. Methods: Adult pts with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, anthracycline-naïve, and ECOG PS 0-1 were eligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 to olaratumab (20mg/kg Cycle 1, 15mg/kg subsequent cycles) or PBO on Days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle combined with dox (75mg/m 2 ) on Day 1 for up to 8 cycles. After 8 cycles, pts with disease control continued olaratumab or PBO until progression or toxicity. Randomization was stratified by histology, prior systemic therapy, ECOG PS, and geographic region. Dexrazoxane use was allowed to mitigate dox-related cardiotoxicity. Primary endpoints were OS in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and/or leiomyosarcoma (LMS) subset of the ITT population; the study was designed to be positive if either primary endpoint was met. Secondary endpoints included PFS, response/disease control rates, safety, and pharmacokinetics. Results: 509 pts were randomized: 258 in the investigational and 251 in the control arm. Baseline pt characteristics were well balanced. Dexrazoxane was received by 63.0% vs 65.1% of pts (investigational vs control arm, respectively, for all data). In the ITT population, median OS was 20.4 vs 19.8 months (m) (HR=1.05, 95% CI: 0.84-1.30; p = 0.69) and was 21.6 vs 21.9 m in LMS pts (HR=0.95, 95% CI: 0.69-1.31; p = 0.76). Median PFS was lower in the investigational arm in the ITT population (5.4 vs 6.8 m; HR=1.23, 95% CI: 1.01-1.50; p = 0.04) and in LMS pts (4.3 vs 6.9 m, HR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.92-1.63; p = 0.17). Median dox exposure was 6 vs 7 cycles. Safety was similar between arms. Olaratumab serum concentrations reached levels expected from prior trials. Additional subgroup/biomarker results will be presented. Conclusions: ANNOUNCE did not confirm that olaratumab + dox, followed by olaratumab monotherapy, improves OS over dox in pts with advanced STS. Further analyses are warranted to explore the inconsistent outcomes between the Ph 3 and Ph 2 studies. Clinical trial information: NCT02451943.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".