MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anti-Angiopoietin Therapy With Trebananib for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer (TRINOVA-1)

2014· article· en· W2954573235 on OpenAlexaff
Bradley J. Monk, Andrés Poveda, Ignace Vergote, Francesco Raspagliesi, Keiichi Fujiwara, Duk‐Soo Bae, Ana Oaknin, Isabelle Ray‐Coquard, Diane Provencher, Beth Y. Karlan, Catherine Lhommé, Gary Richardson, Dolores Gallardo Rincón, Robert L. Coleman, Thomas J. Herzog, Christian Marth, Arija Brize, Michel Fabbro, Andrés Redondo, Aristotelis Bamias, Marjan Tassoudji, Lynn Navale, Douglas Warner, Amit M. Oza

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBevacizumabOvarian cancerAdverse effectAngiogenesisVascular endothelial growth factorOncologyInternal medicineProgression-free survivalCancerEndometrial cancerChemotherapyGastroenterologyVEGF receptors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Angiogenesis has become an important target for treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer. The growth of new blood vessels is critical for cancer growth, metastases, and progression. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays a key role in epithelial ovarian cancer. Adding anti-VEGF treatment to first-line chemotherapy, to maintenance therapy, or at the time of recurrence significantly prolongs progression-free survival. However, these agents have several adverse effects, including hypertension, thrombosis, emboli, bleeding, impaired wound healing, proteinuria, and bowel perforation. As many as a third of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer discontinue anti-VEGF treatment because of these adverse events. Trebananib has a mechanism of action and toxicity profile different from other antiangiogenesis agents. It inhibits angiogenesis by preventing the binding of angiopoietins 1 and 2 to the Tie2 receptor. In a randomized phase 2 trial, trebananib prolonged progression-free survival in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. This agent has mild and reversible adverse events. Edema is a unique adverse effect. The aim of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial was to determine whether adding trebananib to single-agent weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer would improve progression-free survival. A total of 919 women with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer from 32 countries were enrolled between November 10, 2010, and November 19, 2012. Eligible patients had been treated previously with 3 or fewer regimens and also had a platinum-free interval of less than 12 months. Patients were enrolled using a computerized interactive voice response system and were randomized to receive weekly intravenous paclitaxel at 80 mg/m2 plus either weekly masked intravenous placebo (n = 458) or trebananib at 15 mg/kg (n = 461). Patients were stratified according to platinum-free interval (≥0 and ≤6 months vs >6 and ≤12 months), presence or absence of measurable disease, and region (North America, western Europe, Australia, or rest of world). All site staff, investigators, and patients were masked to the treatment assignments. The primary study outcome was progression-free survival. Data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat. At a median follow-up of 10.1 months, median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the trebananib group than in the placebo group (7.2 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.8–7.4 vs 5.4 months; 95% CI, 4.3–5.5], respectively); the hazard ratio was 0.66, with a 95% CI of 0.57–0.77, P < 0.0001. No significant difference was found between treatment groups in the incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events (placebo: 244 [54%] patients vs trebananib: 258 [56%] patients). Grade 3 or higher adverse events included the following: ascites (34 [8%] in the placebo group vs 52 [11%] in the trebananib group), neutropenia (40 [9%] vs 26 [6%]), and abdominal pain (21 [5%] vs 22 [5%]). Edema occurred more frequently among patients in the trebananib group (294 [64%]) than in the placebo group (127 [28%]), but it was generally mild. More adverse event–related treatment discontinuations occurred in the trebananib group than in the placebo group (77 [17%] patients vs 27 [6%] patients, respectively). There was less than a 2% difference between groups in incidence of the class-specific adverse events associated with anti-VEGF therapy (hypertension, proteinuria, impaired wound healing, thrombotic events, and bowel perforation); bleeding was more common in the placebo group (75 [17%] vs 46 [10%]). These findings show that trebananib provides a clinically meaningful prolongation in progression-free survival when added to weekly paclitaxel in the treatment of recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Although edema was increased, it was generally mild. Typical anti-VEGF–associated adverse events were not prominent. The data suggest that trebananib may be a non-VEGF antiangiogenesis option in this population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207