MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for olaparib versus enzalutamide or abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations: PROfound.

2020· article· en· W3028840094 on OpenAlexaff
Antoine Thiery-Vuillemin, Johann S. de Bono, Fred Saad, Giuseppe Procopio, Neal D. Shore, Karim Fizazi, Guilhem Roubaud, Gabriel Marques dos Anjos, Gwénaëlle Gravis, Jae Young Joung, Nobuaki Matsubara, Daniel Castellano, Arnold Degboe, Christopher Gresty, Jinyu Kang, A. Allen, Joseph E. Burgents, Maha Hussain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPARP inhibition in cancer therapy
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOlaparibMedicineEnzalutamideProstate cancerCohortInternal medicineOncologyPopulationQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialCancerAndrogen receptorPoly ADP ribose polymerase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5539 Background: In the randomized Phase III PROfound trial (NCT02987543), olaparib significantly prolonged radiographic progression-free survival compared with physician’s choice of new hormonal agent (pcNHA, enzalutamide or abiraterone) in men with mCRPC and HRR gene alterations, whose disease had progressed on prior NHA. Olaparib significantly improved time to pain progression in Cohort A. We report additional patient reported outcome measures of HRQoL in the overall study population (Cohorts A+B). Methods: HRQoL was assessed in the overall study population using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire, comprising 5 subscales: physical wellbeing (PWB), functional wellbeing (FWB), emotional wellbeing, social wellbeing, and prostate cancer subscale (PCS). The Trial Outcome Index (TOI; PWB+FWB+PCS) and FACT Advanced Prostate Symptom Index (FAPSI-6: derived from 6 FACT-P items) were also calculated. Adjusted mean change and time to deterioration in scores were statistically analyzed. Results: Baseline FACT-P total score was similar for both treatment arms. FACT-P total and subscale scores during treatment were all higher for olaparib vs pcNHA, with clinically meaningful differences between treatment arms in the adjusted least square (LS) mean changes from baseline in all but FWB and FAPSI-6 (Table). The time to deterioration in FACT-P total and TOI, FAPSI-6, PWB and PCS scores favored olaparib but were not statistically significant, with hazard ratios ranging from 0.68 to 0.94. Further HRQoL results for cohort A will also be presented. Conclusions: Olaparib delayed deterioration in HRQoL scores vs pcNHA and was associated with better HRQoL functioning over time compared with pcNHA in men with mCRPC and HRR gene alterations. Clinical trial information: NCT02987543 . [Table: see text]

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.367
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicPARP inhibition in cancer therapyFrench-language works237,207