MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interim safety analysis of a compassionate-use program (CUP) and early-access program (EAP) providing cabazitaxel (Cbz) plus prednisone (P) to patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel.

2013· article· en· W2952789992 on OpenAlexaff
Zafar Malik, Giuseppe Di Lorenzo, Mert Başaran, Alexandros Ardavanis, Phillip Parente, Wito de Schultz, Fred Saad, Inge M. van Oort, Winald R. Gerritsen, Luis Aparicio, Geoffrey Matus, Simon Hitier, Axel Heidenreich, Amit Bahl

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCabazitaxelProstate cancerInternal medicineAdverse effectDocetaxelInterim analysisMitoxantroneFebrile neutropeniaSurgeryCancerToxicityNeutropeniaClinical trialChemotherapyAndrogen deprivation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5055 Background: Cbz + P provides a significant survival benefit vs mitoxantrone + P in pts with mCRPC (Phase III TROPIC study [NCT00417079]; hazard ratio 0.70; p < 0.0001). These findings supported the initiation of ongoing Sanofi-funded CUP and EAP (NCT01254279) to provide access to Cbz prior to commercialization and to collect real-life safety data. Methods: Expected enrollment is ~1600 pts with mCRPC from 250 centers worldwide. Pts receive Cbz (25 mg/m2 Q3W) + P (10 mg oral QD) until progressive disease (PD), death, unacceptable toxicity, physician/pt decision or Cbz commercial availability. Pts are followed until 30 days after last dose. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) use is recommended as per ASCO guidance. Results: Interim baseline and safety data from the first 1301 pts treated in 37 countries are now available. Mean age was 68 yrs (22% were ≥ 75 yrs). All pts had an ECOG performance status ≤ 2. Median time from initial prostate cancer diagnosis was 57.6 months and 60% of pts had ≥ 2 metastatic sites; the most common were bone (91%) and lymph nodes (regional 30%, distant 27%). In total, 17% had PD whilst on docetaxel. The median number of Cbz cycles was 6 (range 1–22); median relative dose intensity was 99%. Overall, 837 pts (64%) received G-CSF (n = 123 curative [C], n = 765 prophylactic [P] and n = 99 [C + P]). Of 1142 pts (88%) who discontinued Cbz + P, the most common reasons were PD (44%), adverse event (AE; 27%), physician decision (13%) and commercial availability of Cbz (7%). Grade 3–4 AEs possibly related to Cbz + P occurred in 43% of pts; the most frequent were clinical neutropenia (18%), febrile neutropenia (FN; 7%) and diarrhea (4%). Of 80 pts (6%) with AEs leading to death, the AE was related to Cbz + P in 39 pts (3%). Conclusions: These results provide valuable data on Cbz + P treatment in routine clinical practice, confirming the safety results of clinical trials and showing that treatment with Cbz + P is associated with a manageable safety profile. The incidence of FN seems slightly lower than in TROPIC, owing to more frequent use of G-CSF prophylaxis in the CUP and EAP. Clinical trial information: NCT01254279.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207