Impact of concomitant prostate cancer therapy on efficacy and safety of relugolix versus leuprolide in men with advanced prostate cancer: Subgroup analysis from the phase III HERO study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
106 Background: In the phase 3 HERO study, the oral GnRH receptor antagonist, relugolix, demonstrated suppression of testosterone to castrate levels in 96.7% of patients, which was superior to leuprolide, and a 54% lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events relative to leuprolide. To characterize the impact of concomitant prostate cancer treatments with the use of relugolix in advanced prostate cancer from the HERO study, a subgroup analysis for patients receiving various therapies was undertaken. Methods: The HERO study was designed to evaluate relugolix in men with advanced prostate cancer. Overall, 934 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive relugolix 120 mg orally once daily or leuprolide injections every 12 weeks for 48 weeks. In the setting of rising PSA, patients could receive enzalutamide (ENZ) or docetaxel (DOC) 2 months after study initiation. Assessments included sustained testosterone suppression to castrate levels (<50 ng/dL) through 48 weeks and safety parameters. Subgroups analyzed included patients with or without concomitant ENZ, DOC, and any radiation therapy (RT). A sensitivity analysis of the primary endpoint was performed excluding patients who received concomitant therapies that may affect testosterone. Results: Overall, 125 patients (13.4%) took at least one concomitant therapy that could impact testosterone levels. RT was received by 15.9% and 18.8% of patients in the relugolix and leuprolide groups, respectively. ENZ was the most frequently used therapy in the relugolix group (2.7%), with similar use in the leuprolide group (1.9%). DOC was used by 1.3% and 1.6% of patients in the relugolix and leuprolide groups, respectively. All other relevant concomitant therapy were used in <1% of population. The sensitivity analysis results indicated that use of these concomitant therapy that could affect testosterone levels did not impact the primary endpoint. Castration rates were similar with and without concomitant use of ENZ and DOC, or RT (table). No clinically relevant differences in adverse events were observed between patients with or without concomitant use of ENZ, DOC, or RT in either treatment group. Conclusions: While the numbers are small, treatment with relugolix was associated with a similar efficacy and safety profiles in patients who received concomitant administration of ENZ, DOC, or RT to that observed in patients not receiving those concomitant treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT03085095. [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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".