MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase Ib study of niraparib plus androgen receptor-targeted therapy (ART) in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2020· article· en· W3008866163 on OpenAlexaff
Fred Saad, Kim N., Neal D. Shore, Julie N. Graff, Edwin M. Posadas, Byron M. Espina, Eugene Zhu, Anasuya Hazra, Branislav Bradic, Shinta Cheng, Vinny Hayreh, Arash Rezazadeh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersJanssen Research and Development
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerInternal medicineCohortEnzalutamideDiscontinuationAbiraterone acetateNeutropeniaGastroenterologyCancerAndrogen deprivation therapyUrologyOncologyAndrogen receptorChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

122 Background: Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor and abiraterone acetate + prednisone (AA+P) has activity in pts with mCRPC regardless of DNA repair gene defects (DRD). Methods: This phase 1b study (Bedivere; NCT02924766) began with a 3+3 dose escalation of niraparib (Part 1), followed by expansion (Part 2) of the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of nira + AA+P. Pts with mCRPC received nira 200 or 300 mg/day with AA+P. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated the first 28 days. Serial PK for nira were collected on cycle 1 day 1 (C1D1) over 24 h; PK for nira and abiraterone were collected on C2D1 over 10 h. Results: Nira 200 mg + 1000 mg AA+P was selected as the RP2D dose. 4 pts in 200 mg cohort and 8 pts in 300 mg cohort were enrolled in Part 1. During Part 1, 1 patient in the 300 mg cohort had two DLTs: Gr 3 fatigue and Gr 4 increased gamma glutamyltransferase. Therefore, the 200 mg dose was evaluated in 15 pts in Part 2. In 19 total pts treated with 200 mg niraparib, 12 (63%) pts had Gr 3-4 AEs, 5 (26%) pts had an AE with outcome of drug discontinuation and 1 (5%) patient had an AE with outcome of death (general physical health deterioration; unrelated). AEs of special interest were: 6 pts (32%) thrombocytopenia, 6 pts (32%) hypertension, 5 pts (26%) anemia and 3 pts (16%) neutropenia of any grade. 21% pts in 200 mg cohort had treatment emergent serious AE (TESAE) while 50% treated with 300 mg had TESAE. The exposure (AUC24h) on Day 1 of Cycle 2 for 200 mg niraparib with 1000 mg of AA were 17745±9380 ng.h/mL and 712±140 ng.h/mL, respectively. These exposures are consistent with single agent PK. Summaries of all responses will be provided, including a patient with primarily bone disease and carrying an ATM mutation who had a circulating tumor cell conversion and was on study treatment for 22.1 mo. Conclusions: The safety and PK findings support the choice of nira 200 mg in combination with AA+P in pts with mCRPC. The efficacy of nira + AA+P is being evaluated in an ongoing phase 3 MAGNITUDE study (NCT03748641). Clinical trial information: NCT02924766.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→