MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of tumor tissue from >4000 men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): The PROfound phase III study experience.

2020· article· en· W3008469678 on OpenAlexaff
Maha Hussain, Joaquı́n Mateo, Shahneen Sandhu, Karim Fizazi, Fred Saad, Neal D. Shore, David Olmos, Claire Corcoran, Caroline Sibilla, Alexander Kohlmann, Carrie A. Adelman, Julia A. Elvin, Carsten Goessl, Joseph E. Burgents, Johann S. de Bono

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOlaparibEnzalutamideProstate cancerProstatectomyInternal medicineCancerOncologyBiopsyProstateBiomarkerPrimary tumorPathologyMetastasisAndrogen receptorGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

195 Background: The PROfound study (NCT02987543) showed that olaparib provides a statistically significant improvement in radiographic progression-free survival versus physician’s choice of enzalutamide or abiraterone in mCRPC patients (pts) with alterations in genes with a direct or indirect role in the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway. This is the largest study to date with central, prospective tumor tissue testing in pts with mCRPC. Here, we report learnings during testing in the PROfound study. Methods: An investigational clinical trial assay, based on the FoundationOne CDx NGS test developed in partnership with Foundation Medicine, Inc (FMI), was used to prospectively identify pts with qualifying alterations in ≥1 of 15 prespecified genes, including BRCA1, BRCA2 or ATM. Tumor testing was conducted centrally using archival or recent biopsy from primary or metastatic tissue. Results: Of 4047 pts who submitted tumor samples, 2792 (69%) were successfully sequenced and yielded a biomarker status. Categories for test failure (n=1255; 31%) were pathology review failure in 277 (6.8%) pts (eg estimated tumor fraction <20% or tumor volume <0.2 mm2), DNA extraction failure in 533 (13.2%) pts, and failure after DNA extraction in 280 (6.9%) pts, with 165 (4.1%) pts in >1 category. Regarding the sample disposition, approximately two-thirds of samples were from core needle biopsies, although higher success rates were observed with larger samples (ie prostatectomy). Samples were mainly from the prostate gland, with <5% from bone. Most samples were from archived tissue of primary tumors; only ~10% were from newly collected tissue. Test turnaround time, as well as representation of sample characteristics and country of origin relative to success rate, will be presented. Conclusions: The PROfound study has demonstrated that tissue testing to identify HRR alterations in men with mCRPC is feasible. Careful selection of high-quality tumor tissue samples is key to ensure success both at pathology review and during downstream steps of the NGS tissue testing process. Clinical trial information: NCT02987543.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207