MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047245155 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdaa073.018

30. RADIOSURGERY FOLLOWED BY TUMOR TREATING FIELDS FOR BRAIN METASTASES (1–10) FROM NSCLC IN THE PHASE 3 METIS TRIAL

2020· article· en· W3047245155 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Minesh P. Mehta, Vinai Gondi, Paul D. Brown, Manmeet S. Ahluwalia

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiosurgeryClinical endpointLung cancerAdverse effectOncologyNeurocognitiveQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineRandomized controlled trialRadiation therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) are non-invasive, loco-regional, anti-mitotic treatment modality comprising alternating electric fields. TTFields have demonstrated efficacy in preclinical non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) models. TTFields treatment to the brain was safe and extended overall survival in newly-diagnosed glioblastoma. The objective of the METIS study [NCT02831959] is evaluation of the efficacy and safety of TTFields in NSCLC patients with brain metastases. METHODS NSCLC patients (N=270) with 1–10 brain metastases were randomized 1:1 to stereotactic radio surgery (SRS) followed by continuous TTFields ((150 kHz, > 18 hours/day) within 7 days of SRS or supportive care. The portable device delivered TTFields to the brain using 4 transducer arrays, while patients received the best standard-of-care for systemic disease. Patients were followed every two months until second intracranial progression. Key inclusion criteria: KPS ≥70, new diagnosis of 1 inoperable or 2–10 supra- and/or infratentorial brain metastases from NSCLC amenable to SRS; and optimal therapy for extracranial disease. Prior WBRT, surgical resection of metastases, or recurrent brain metastases were exclusionary. Primary endpoint was time to 1st intracranial progression. Secondary endpoints included time to neurocognitive failure (HVLT, COWAT and TMT), overall survival, radiological response rate (RANO-BM and RECIST V1.1); quality-of-life; adverse events; time to first/second intracranial progression for patients with 1–4 and 5–10 brain metastases; bi-monthly intracranial progression rate from 2–12 months; and time to second intracranial and distant progression. The sample size (N=270) was calculated using a log-rank test (Lakatos 1988 and 2002) with 80% power at two sided alpha of 0.05 to detect a hazard ratio of 0.57. On September, 2019, an independent Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) reviewed METIS trial data collected to that point. The DMC concluded that no unexpected safety issues had emerged and recommended continuation of the METIS study as planned.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.643

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207