MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Recurrent or metastatic salivary gland tumor (MSGT) patients treated with selinexor, a first in class selective exportin-1 (XPO1) inhibitor.

2020· article· en· W3032033385 on OpenAlexaff
Eoghan Ruadh Malone, Anna Spreafico, Ilan Weinreb, Sarah Jennings, Lindsay Carlsson, Ahmad Zia Noori, Lisa Wang, Lillian L. Siu, Aaron R. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCDKN2AMedicineSalivary gland cancerSalivary glandSTK11Fluorescence in situ hybridizationCancer researchCancerAcinic cell carcinomaInternal medicineSalivary duct carcinomaImmunohistochemistryPathologyOncologyKRASBiologyGeneGeneticsColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6586 Background: MSGT are rare with limited systemic treatments. This single institution, prospective study in recurrent or metastatic (RM) MSGT involved 2 phases: genomic profiling followed by treatment with either genomically-matched or unmatched therapy. Here we present the results of the unmatched arm for patients (pts) treated with S an oral selective inhibitor of XPO1 that leads to activation of tumor suppressor proteins and retention of oncoprotein mRNAs in the cell nucleus, inducing cancer cell apoptosis. Methods: Patients (pts) with RM-MSGT had archived paraffin embedded tumor samples profiled with targeted next generation sequencing, immunohistochemistry for androgen receptor (AR) and fluorescent in-situ hybridization for HER-2 and ALK. If no actionable mutations were identified or if no matched agents were available, pts with progressive disease could receive S (60mg given twice weekly Q28 days). The study had a simon-2 stage design; 1 partial response in the first 18 pts treated with S, would trigger an additional 7pts to receive S in stage 2. Results: Between July 2014 and April 2019 85 pts were enrolled on study: 73 had sequencing which identified 41 with no actionable mutations and 32 with actionable mutations. 18 pts (10F/8M, median age 61 years [40-79]) were treated with S and included adenoid cystic (n = 8), salivary duct (n = 4), acinic cell (n = 2) and other subtypes (n = 4). Of these 18, 4 pts had actionable aberrations: AR amplification (n = 2), mutations in SMARCB1 (n = 1) and CDKN2A (n = 1). 13pts were treatment naïve, 3pts and 2pts received 1 and 2 or more lines of treatment respectively prior to enrollment: androgen deprivation therapy (n = 2), chemotherapy (n = 3), early phase clinical trials (n = 3). The median number of cycles of S received were 3 (range: 1-19). The best response by RECIST was SD in 13pts (72%) (SD > 6 months (range: 6-18 months) in 5pts (28%); tumor reduction measured in 7pts (39%)), no PRs, PD in 3pts (17%), and 2pts (11%) were not evaluable for response due to insufficient duration of treatment coming off early due to toxicity. The median PFS (95% CI) was 7.6 (3.5-NA) months and the median OS (95% CI) was 15.4 (7.3-NA) months. The most common drug-related toxicities were grade 1-2 fatigue 14pts (78%), nausea 13pts (72%) and dysguesia 10pts (56%). 5 (28%) pts had a dose reduction and 6 (33%) in total had a dose interruption due to toxicity. Conclusions: Single agent antitumor activity was limited and the side effect profile was tolerable. No specific genomic aberration was associated with response to S. Clinical trial information: NCT02069730 .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→