MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041579002 · doi:10.1136/esmoopen-2020-000673

Phase I, open-label, multicentre study of buparlisib in combination with temozolomide or with concomitant radiation therapy and temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma

2020· article· en· W3041579002 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Y. Wen, Jordi Rodón, Warren Mason, J.T. Beck, John DeGroot, V Donnet, David Mills, Mona El-Hashimy, Mark Rosenthal

Bibliographic record

VenueESMO Open · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNovartis Pharma
KeywordsTemozolomideConcomitantMedicineGlioblastomaRadiation therapyOncologyInternal medicineOpen labelClinical trialCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Most glioblastoma tumours exhibit intrinsic phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway activation. Preclinical in vitro and in vivo models suggest that buparlisib (an oral pan-PI3K inhibitor) can have an effect on glioblastoma directly and by enhancing the activity of radiation and of temozolomide. METHODS: This was a phase I, two-stage, multicentre, open-label, dose-escalation study of buparlisib in combination with temozolomide and radiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. In stage I, patients who completed the concomitant phase of combination of temozolomide and radiation prior to study entry received buparlisib in combination with temozolomide. In stage II, patients received buparlisib in combination with temozolomide and radiotherapy in the concomitant phase and temozolomide in the adjuvant treatment phase. The primary objective was to estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of buparlisib when combined with the approved first-line treatment of temozolomide and radiotherapy. RESULTS: The MTD of buparlisib in combination with temozolomide at stage I (adjuvant phase only) was 80 mg/day, which was used as the starting dose in stage II. The MTD of buparlisib in combination with temozolomide and radiotherapy in stage II (concomitant + adjuvant phase) was not determined due to the observed dose-limiting toxicities and treatment discontinuations due to adverse events (AEs). In stage I, the most commonly reported AEs were nausea (72.7%) and fatigue (59.1%). In stage II, the most commonly reported AEs were fatigue and nausea (56.3% each). No on-treatment deaths were reported during the study. CONCLUSION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01473901.

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESMO OpenSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207