MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

<i>HSD3B1</i> (1245A&gt;C) polymorphism and clinical outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients treated with abiraterone acetate (AA) and enzalutamide (ENZA): Results from two prospective studies.

2020· article· en· W3031402932 on OpenAlexaffabout
Isabel M. Aragón, Daniel Khalaf, Rebeca Lozano, Matti Annala, Sinja Taavitsainen, David Lorente, Daygen L. Finch, Nuria Romero-Laorden, Joanna Vergidis, Ylenia Cendón, Conrad D. Oja, M.I. Pacheco, Muhammad Zulfiqar, Martin Gleave, Alexander W. Wyatt, David Olmos, Elena Castro, Kim N.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaKelowna General HospitalBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnzalutamideMedicineProstate cancerInternal medicineGenotypeOncologyAbiraterone acetateCohortHazard ratioProspective cohort studyProportional hazards modelAndrogen receptorCancerAndrogen deprivation therapyGeneticsBiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5525 Background: The common HSD3B1 (1245A > C) germline variant is associated with increased de-novo synthesis of androgens and worse outcomes in men treated with androgen-deprivation therapy in metastatic hormone sensitive prostate cancer. The aim of this study is to determine the role of this polymorphism on treatment outcomes for AA and ENZA in patients with mCRPC. Methods: A total of 547 patients treated with AA or ENZA for mCRPC from two prospective cohorts; cohort 1 included 202 from British Columbia (Canada) and cohort 2 enrolled 345 patients from the Spanish study PROREPAIR-B. HSD3B1 genotype was determined by targeted sequencing in cohort 1 and by Taqman SNP genotyping assay in cohort 2. Associations between HSD3B1 genotypes and (TTPP), time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated via univariate COX regression. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine the independent association of each covariate. Results: The proportions of patients with a homozygous wild-type HSD3B1 (AA), heterozygous (AC) and homozygous variant (CC) genotype were respectively 45.6%, 39.4% and 15%. As expected, known prognostic factors for mCRPC such as hemoglobin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), LDH, PSA at baseline as well as site of metastasis were significantly associated with TTPP and TPP. In the combined cohort, HSD3B1 (CC) genotype was associated with worse TTP (HR 1.31, 95%CI 1.02-1.67, p = 0.032) and PSA response rates (48% for CC vs 62% and 65% for AA and AC, respectively (p = 0.019, χ²)). Similar trend was observed for TTPP (HR 1.28, 95%CI 0.99-1.66, p = 0.064). OS was not different among genotypes, but was significantly shorter for patients with CC genotype in cohort 1 (HR 1.97, 95%CI 1.14-3.40, p = 0.016). There was no association between HSD3B1 genotype and time to castration-resistance in either of the two cohorts. Multivariable analysis showed that LDH, ALP, hemoglobin and use of AA or ENZA as first-line therapy for mCRPC were independent prognostic factors for TTP and TTPP; non-significant association was observed for genotype and TTP. Conclusions: HSD3B1 homozygous variant genotype (CC) was associated with shorter TTP and lower PSA response rate in mCRPC patients treated with AA or ENZA. However, the CC genotype did not provide prognostic information beyond that conferred by standard clinical variables, suggesting that it may not be a suitable stand-alone biomarker in mCRPC.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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