MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984246397 · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2019.10.002

Phase II study of CC-486 (oral azacitidine) in previously treated patients with locally advanced or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma

2019· article· en· W2984246397 on OpenAlexaff
Ricard Mesı́a, Paolo Bossi, Aaron R. Hansen, Ching-Yun Hsieh, Lisa Licitra, Eng-Huat Tan, Peng Chen, JulieAnn Miller, L.L. Siu, Robert I. Haddad

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cancer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersCelgene
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityNeutropeniaInternal medicineNasopharyngeal carcinomaAdverse effectFebrile neutropeniaPhases of clinical researchPopulationPerformance statusProgressive diseaseOncologySurgeryGastroenterologyToxicityCancerChemotherapyRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Treatment options are limited for recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). We report results from a phase II study of CC-486 (oral azacitidine) in advanced NPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic NPC and 1-2 prior treatment regimens received CC-486 300 mg daily on days 1-14 of 21-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The first 6 patients of Asian-Pacific Islander (API) ethnicity received a reduced dose of 200 mg to preserve safety and tolerability; if well tolerated, subsequent API patients received CC-486 300 mg. The study could advance to stage 2 if > 4 patients achieved a response. Co-primary end-points were overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (independent review). Key secondary end-points were overall survival and safety. RESULTS: Owing to faster-than-anticipated enrolment, 36 patients, including 13 of API ethnicity, were enrolled; the median age was 54.0 years. Most patients were male (81%) and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 1 (97%). Among 25 efficacy-evaluable patients, the ORR was 12%; the median progression-free and overall survival were 4.7 and 18.0 months, respectively. The most common grade III/IV treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (33%) and febrile neutropenia (11%). Twenty-one posttreatment deaths, primarily due to progressive disease or disease complications, and 1 on-treatment death (epistaxis, unrelated to study drug) occurred. The study did not advance to stage 2. CONCLUSION: CC-486 did not show sufficient clinical activity to support further development as monotherapy in this patient population. The safety profile of CC-486 in NPC was consistent with that in other solid tumours.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of CancerSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207