MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984886575 · doi:10.1136/ijgc-2019-000623

Antitumor activity of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib as monotherapy in patients with platinum-sensitive, relapsed, BRCA-mutated, high-grade ovarian cancer, and an update on safety

2019· article· en· W2984886575 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Kristeleit, Ana Oaknin, Isabelle Ray‐Coquard, Alexandra Léary, Judith Balmañà, Yvette Drew, Amit M. Oza, Ronnie Shapira‐Frommer, Susan M. Domchek, T. Cameron, Lara Maloney, Sandra Goble, Domenica Lorusso, Jonathan A. Ledermann, Iain A. McNeish

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecological Cancer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPARP inhibition in cancer therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersFoundation MedicineNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome TrustClovis OncologyUniversity College LondonWellcome
KeywordsMedicinePARP inhibitorOvarian cancerPoly ADP ribose polymerasePolymeraseCancer researchBRCA mutationOlaparibOncologyInternal medicinePharmacologyCancerGeneGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Objective</h3> To report results from an integrated efficacy and safety analysis supporting the European Commission9s approval of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib as monotherapy treatment for relapsed, platinum-sensitive, <i>BRCA</i>-mutated ovarian cancer. <h3>Methods</h3> Efficacy was analyzed in platinum-sensitive patients from Study 10 (NCT01482715) and ARIEL2 (NCT01891344) who had high-grade serous or endometrioid epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer and a deleterious <i>BRCA1</i> or <i>BRCA2</i> mutation and received two or more prior chemotherapies (including two or more platinum-based therapies). The primary end point was investigator-assessed, confirmed objective response rate (visit cut-off: April 10, 2017). Safety was analyzed in patients with ovarian cancer, regardless of <i>BRCA</i> mutation status or lines of prior chemotherapies, who received at least one dose of rucaparib 600 mg in either study (visit cut-off: December 31, 2017). <h3>Results</h3> In the integrated platinum-sensitive efficacy population (n=79), objective response rate was 64.6% (95% CI, 53.0 to 75.0); 10.1% (8/79) of patients had a complete response and 54.4% (43/79) had a partial response. Median duration of response was 294 days (95% CI, 224 to 393). In the integrated safety population (n=565), the most common any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (77.7%, 439/565), asthenia/fatigue (74.7%, 422/565), vomiting (45.8%, 259/565), and hemoglobin decreased (44.2%, 250/565). Treatment-emergent adverse events led to treatment interruption, dose reduction, or discontinuation in 60.2% (340/565), 46.0% (260/565), and 16.8% (95/565) of patients. <h3>Conclusions</h3> In patients with platinum-sensitive, <i>BRCA</i>-mutated ovarian cancer, rucaparib demonstrated antitumor activity and is the first and currently the only poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor approved by the European Commission as treatment for this population. The safety analysis used a more recent visit cut-off date and larger population than previously published, was consistent with prior reports, and was the basis for the treatment-indication safety population in rucaparib’s recently updated European Union label.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecological CancerSame topicPARP inhibition in cancer therapyFrench-language works237,207