MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with advanced breast cancer (ABC) with visceral metastases (mets), including those with liver mets, treated with ribociclib (RIB) plus endocrine therapy (ET) in the MONALEESA (ML) -3 and -7 trials.

2020· article· en· W3031097250 on OpenAlexaff
Denise A. Yardley, Arnd Nusch, Yoon Sim Yap, Gabe S. Sonke, Thomas Bachelot, Arlene Chan, Patrick Neven, Dennis J. Slamon, Paul Wheatley‐Price, Agnes Lteif, Manu Sondhi, Karen Rodriguez-Lorenc, Anil Gaur, Stephen Chia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineFulvestrantBreast cancerGastroenterologyCancerSurgeryEstrogen receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1054 Background: In the Phase III ML-3 (NCT02422615) and ML-7 (NCT02278120) trials, RIB + ET demonstrated a significant OS benefit (ML-3: HR, 0.72, P = 0.00455; ML-7: HR, 0.71, P = 0.00973) over placebo (PBO) + ET in pts with HR+/HER2- ABC (Im et al. N Engl J Med. 2019; Slamon et al. N Engl J Med. 2019). The presence of visceral mets generally portends a poor prognosis, which is especially poor in pts with liver mets (He et al. Ann Oncol. 2019). Here we report OS in pts with visceral mets with a focus on those with liver mets in ML-3 and ML-7. Methods: In ML-3, postmenopausal pts were randomized 2:1 to receive RIB + fulvestrant (FUL) or PBO + FUL as first- (1L) or second-line (2L) treatment. In ML-7, premenopausal pts were randomized 1:1 to receive RIB + ET or PBO + ET (this analysis included only pts who received an NSAI as ET partner to match approved indication). Results: Visceral mets were identified in 293 pts (60.5%) in the RIB arm and 147 (60.7%) in the PBO arm in ML-3 and 150 (44.8%) and 142 pts (42.1%), respectively, in ML-7. In ML-3, the median age of pts with visceral mets was 63 and 65 years in the RIB and PBO arms, and in ML-7 it was 42.5 and 45.0 years, respectively. In ML-3, 214 pts with visceral mets received 1L therapy (RIB, n = 137; PBO, n = 77), while 219 pts received 2L therapy or had early relapse (RIB, n = 151; PBO, n = 68). Lung and liver were the most common sites of visceral mets for pts in ML-3 (49.8% and 44.8%, respectively) and ML-7 (51.4% and 58.2%, respectively). OS HRs in pts with visceral mets were consistent with the benefit in the overall pt populations and suggested a particularly substantial OS benefit in pts with liver mets (HR for liver mets group in ML-3, 0.629 [95% CI, 0.421-0.942]; HR in ML-7, 0.531 [95% CI, 0.321-0.877]; Table). No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: Approximately half of the pts in ML-3 and ML-7 had visceral mets. The OS data in these pts are consistent with the benefit observed with RIB in the overall populations of each trial. In pts with liver mets, a group with an especially poor prognosis, RIB + ET demonstrated a substantial OS benefit compared with PBO + ET. Clinical trial information: NCT02422615; NCT02278120 . [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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207