Exploratory gene-by-gene analysis of olaparib in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): PROfound.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
126 Background: The Phase 3 PROfound trial (NCT02987543) met its primary endpoint and key secondary endpoints, including improved overall survival (OS) for olaparib in men with mCRPC with alterations in BRCA1, BRCA2, or ATM (Cohort A). We report gene-by-gene analysis of olaparib antitumor activity among the 15 prespecified homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Methods: Pts were randomized to olaparib (300 mg bid; n=256) or physician’s choice of enzalutamide or abiraterone (control; n=131). Exploratory analyses in pts with alterations in BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 (BRCA, regardless of co-occurring alterations with other HRR genes) or in single genes were conducted. Results: Evidence of olaparib antitumor activity was observed in subgroups with >10 pts (table). Data for pts with alterations in only BRCA1, BRCA2, PPP2R2A, RAD51B, RAD54L, PALB2, BRIP1, CHEK1, BARD1, and RAD51D will be reported (no FANCL or RAD51C enrolled). Conclusions: Small subgroups limit interpretation for some genes. Olaparib antitumor activity is greatest in pts with BRCA alterations, with a spectrum of clinical sensitivity to olaparib as defined by rPFS and OS across the broader population with alterations in other HRR genes. Clinical trial information: NCT02987543. [Table: see text]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".