MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ENESTop 192-week results: Treatment-free remission (TFR) in patients (pts) with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) after stopping second-line (2L) nilotinib (NIL).

2019· article· en· W2957103174 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy P. Hughes, Carla Boquimpani, Naoto Takahashi, Noam Benyamini, Nelma Cristina D. Clementino, Vasily Shuvaev, Jeffrey H. Lipton, Anna Turkina, Raquel De Paz Arias, Beatriz Moiraghi, Franck E. Nicolini, Jolanta Dengler, Tomasz Sacha, Dong‐Wook Kim, Rafik Fellague-Chebra, Sandip Acharya, Catherine Bouard, François‐Xavier Mahon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineNilotinibImatinibGastroenterologyImatinib mesylateSurgeryMyeloid leukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7005 Background: In the ENESTop study (NCT01698905) of TFR in pts with CML-CP who achieved a sustained deep molecular response (MR) with 2L NIL, 57.9% remained in TFR 48 wks after stopping NIL (primary endpoint). Analyses at 144 wks showed durability of TFR. Data from longer follow-up (192 wks) evaluating the maintenance of TFR are reported. Methods: Pts treated with ≥2 y NIL after > 4 wks imatinib (≥3 y total) and achieving MR4.5 ( BCR-ABL1IS ≤0.0032%) on NIL were eligible. After a 1 y consolidation, pts with no confirmed loss of MR4.5 could attempt TFR. NIL was resumed upon loss of major MR ( BCR-ABL1IS ≤0.1%) or confirmed loss of MR4 ( BCR-ABL1IS ≤0.01%). At the data cut-off (Sep 24 2018), all pts had completed ≥192 wks of TFR, resumed NIL, or discontinued the study. Results: By the data cut-off, of 126 pts entering TFR, 56 were ongoing, 59 had resumed NIL, and 11 had discontinued. TFR rate at 192 wks was 46.0% (58/126; 95% CI, 37.1–55.1%); all but 1 of the 58 pts were in MR4.5. Only 1/61 pts in TFR at 144 wks lost response by 192 wks (confirmed loss of MR4); another 2 pts discontinued due to serious AE (polycythemia vera) and pt/guardian decision, respectively. Of 59 pts who resumed NIL, 56 (94.9%) and 55 (93.2%) regained MR4 and MR4.5, respectively. 40/56 pts (71.4%) who regained MR4 had stable MR4 at 96 wks (12 discontinued < 96 wks, and 4 remained on study with < 96 wks, after regaining MR4); 37/55 pts (67.3%) who regained MR4.5 had stable MR4.5 at 96 wks (12 discontinued < 96 wks, and 6 remained on study with < 96 wks, after regaining MR4.5). There were no disease progressions, deaths due to CML, or new deaths since the 144-wk analysis. The 192 wk treatment-free survival rate was 50.3% (95% CI, 41.2–58.7%). Of 62 pts who remained in TFR for > 144 wks, 11.3%, 53.2%, 21.0%, 14.5% and 3.2% had musculoskeletal pain AEs during consolidation and each subsequent 48 wk period of TFR. Among 59 pts who resumed NIL, most common AEs were hypertension (20.3%) and arthralgia (13.6%); the majority of AEs were grade 1/2. Conclusions: Results demonstrate long-term durability and safety of TFR following 2L NIL, with no disease progressions or CML-related deaths, and musculoskeletal pain AEs were transient. Clinical trial information: NCT01698905.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicChronic Myeloid Leukemia TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207