MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038487399 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-20-0219

A Biomarker-enriched, Randomized Phase II Trial of Adavosertib (AZD1775) Plus Paclitaxel and Carboplatin for Women with Platinum-sensitive <i>TP53</i> -mutant Ovarian Cancer

2020· article· en· W3038487399 on OpenAlexaff
Amit M. Oza, Maria Del Pilar Estevez-Diz, Eva‐Maria Grischke, Marcia Hall, Frederik Marmé, Diane Provencher, Denise Uyar, Johanne I. Weberpals, Robert M. Wenham, Naomi Laing, Michaël Tracy, Tomoko Freshwater, Mark A. Lee, Liu Ji, Jingjun Qiu, Shelonitda Rose, Eric H. Rubin, Kathleen N. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersMerckAstraZeneca
KeywordsCarboplatinMedicineTolerabilityInternal medicineChemotherapyOncologyAdverse effectOvarian cancerResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsGastroenterologyPlaceboClinical endpointHazard ratioPemetrexedCancerProgression-free survivalRandomized controlled trialSurgeryPhases of clinical researchConfidence intervalCisplatinPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Preclinical studies show that adavosertib, a WEE1 kinase inhibitor, sensitizes TP53-mutant cells to chemotherapy. We hypothesized that adavosertib, plus chemotherapy, would enhance efficacy versus placebo in TP53-mutated ovarian cancer. Patients and Methods: Following safety run-in, this double-blind phase II trial (NCT01357161) randomized women with TP53-mutated, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer to oral adavosertib (225 mg twice daily for 2.5 days/21-day cycle) or placebo, plus carboplatin (AUC5) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m2), until disease progression or for six cycles. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) by enhanced RECIST v1.1 [ePFS (volumetric)] and safety. Secondary/exploratory objectives included PFS by RECIST v1.1 (single dimension), objective response rate, overall survival, and analysis of tumor gene profile versus sensitivity to adavosertib. Results: A total of 121 patients were randomized to adavosertib (A+C; n = 59) and placebo (P+C; n = 62) plus chemotherapy. Adding adavosertib to chemotherapy improved ePFS [median, 7.9 (95% confidence interval (CI), 6.9–9.9) vs. 7.3 months (5.6–8.2); HR 0.63 (95% CI, 0.38–1.06); two-sided P = 0.080], meeting the predefined significance threshold (P < 0.2). Clinical benefit was observed following A+C for patients with different TP53 mutation subtypes, identifying possible response biomarkers. An increase in adverse events was seen with A+C versus P+C: greatest for diarrhea (adavosertib 75%; placebo 37%), vomiting (63%; 27%), anemia (53%; 32%), and all grade ≥3 adverse events (78%; 65%). Conclusions: Establishing an optimal strategy for managing tolerability and identifying specific patient populations most likely to benefit from treatment may increase clinical benefit. Future studies should consider additional adavosertib doses within the chemotherapy treatment cycle and the potential for maintenance therapy.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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)0.0040.001

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations123
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207