MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ADAGIO: A phase IIb, open-label, single-arm, multicenter study assessing the efficacy and safety of adavosertib (AZD1775) as treatment for recurrent or persistent uterine serous carcinoma.

2021· article· en· W3166171733 on OpenAlexaff
Joyce F. Liu, Nicoletta Colombo, Amit M. Oza, Ana Oaknin, Lydia Gaba, Jean‐Sébastien Frenel, Nicole Nevadunsky, Victoria de Giorgio‐Miller, Pingping Ni, Dana Ghiorghiu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKRASSerous fluidInternal medicineClear cell carcinomaOncologyNeuroblastoma RAS viral oncogene homologCarcinomaCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS5612 Background: There is a high unmet medical need for therapies treating uterine serous carcinoma (USC), an aggressive type of endometrial carcinoma with an increased likelihood of recurrence and limited therapeutic options. 5-year overall survival (OS) for USC is estimated to be 35–50% for women with stage I–II disease and 0–15% for women with stage III–IV disease (Acharya et al. Lancet Oncol 2005). USC exhibits high rates of mutation in TP53 ( > 90% of cases), as well as mutations or amplifications in other cell-cycle regulators or oncogenes, including CCNE1, FBXW7, MYC, RB1, and KRAS/ NRAS (Zhao et al. PNAS 2013; Levine DA et al. Nature 2013), which may contribute to increased replication stress and susceptibility to inhibition of the tyrosine kinase WEE1. WEE1 inhibition is expected to release a tumor cell from DNA-damage-induced arrest at the G2/M boundary, so that unrepaired DNA damage may be taken into mitosis, leading to cell death. A Phase II study of the WEE1 inhibitor adavosertib in 34 women with recurrent or persistent USC reported an objective response rate (ORR) of 29.4% and a median duration of response (DoR) of 9.0 months; further correlative analysis and a translational biopsy cohort are planned (Liu et al. J Clin Oncol 2020). This Phase IIb study, ADAGIO, a single-arm, multicenter, global study (NCT04590248), aims to expand on these findings and will evaluate the efficacy and safety of adavosertib in women with recurrent or persistent USC who have previously received platinum-based chemotherapy. Methods: Women aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed recurrent or persistent USC who have previously received at least one platinum-based chemotherapy regimen for the management of USC and have evidence of measurable disease according to RECIST v1.1 are eligible for this study. Participants with carcinosarcomas are not eligible. Prior receipt of immune checkpoint inhibitors, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 targeted therapy is permitted, with no restriction on the number of prior lines of systemic therapy a participant may have previously received. Approximately 120 eligible participants will receive oral adavosertib 300 mg qd on days 1–5 and 8–12 of a 21-day treatment cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or another discontinuation criterion is met. The primary outcome measure is ORR, defined as the percentage of patients with measurable disease at baseline who have a confirmed complete or partial response, as determined by blinded independent central review (RECIST v1.1 assessment every 6 weeks for the first 48 weeks, then every 9 weeks). Secondary outcome measures include DoR, depth of response, progression-free survival, OS, disease control rate, biomarkers, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. Clinical trial information: NCT04590248.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207