MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Results from CONTESSA 2: A multinational, multicenter, phase 2 study of tesetaxel (T) plus a reduced dose of capecitabine (C) in patients (pts) with hormone receptor + (HR+), HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC) not previously treated with a taxane.

2021· article· en· W3167076087 on OpenAlexaff
Lee S. Schwartzberg, Igor Bondarenko, Sara M. Tolaney, Andrew D. Seidman, Joyce O’Shaughnessy, Yaroslav Shparyk, Chi-Feng Chung, Yen‐Shen Lu, Núria Chic, Lawrence Panasci, Yee Soo Chae, Sabela Recalde, Yevhen Hotko, Patricia Gómez, Gail Lynn Shaw Wright, N. D'Acosta, Sina Vatandoust, Joseph O’Connell, Thomas Wei, Hope S. Rugo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTaxaneCapecitabineMetastatic breast cancerClinical endpointInternal medicineBreast cancerPhases of clinical researchCancerOncologyGastroenterologyChemotherapyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1061 Research Funding: Odonate Therapeutics, Inc. Background: T is a novel, oral taxane with unique properties, including: oral administration with a low pill burden, a long (8-day) half-life in humans, once-every-3-weeks dosing, no observed hypersensitivity reactions and significant activity against chemotherapy (CT)-resistant breast cancer cell lines. T had encouraging monotherapy activity in a phase 2 study in 38 pts with HR+, HER2- MBC, with a confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST 1.1 of 45% (Seidman, 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting, Abstract 1042). In CONTESSA, a randomized phase 3 study in 685 pts with HR+, HER2- MBC previously treated with a taxane, T plus a reduced dose of C improved progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by the Independent Radiologic Review Committee (IRC) vs. the approved dose of C alone: median of 9.8 months (mo) vs. 6.9 mo, an improvement of 2.9 mo (HR=0.716; p=0.003) (O'Shaughnessy, SABCS 2020, GS4-01). Methods: CONTESSA 2 is a multinational, multicenter, phase 2 study of T (27 mg/m2 on day 1 of a 21-day cycle) plus a reduced dose of C (1,650 mg/m2/day for 14 days of a 21-day cycle) in pts with HR+, HER2- MBC previously treated with 0-1 prior CT regimens for MBC and not previously treated with a taxane. The primary endpoint is ORR as assessed by the IRC. The secondary efficacy endpoints are duration of response (DoR), PFS and disease control rate (DCR) as assessed by the IRC, and overall survival (OS). Results: 150 pts were enrolled and treated. 80% had visceral disease, 46% had de novo MBC, 52% were previously treated with a CDK 4/6 inhibitor and 33% were ≥65 years old. At the prespecified interim analysis approx 4 mo after the last patient enrolled, the confirmed ORR was 51% (95% CI: 42%-60%), and the unconfirmed ORR was 63% (95% CI: 54%-71%). The median DoR was 9.5 mo (95% CI: 5.4-11.5 mo), the median PFS was 12.9 mo (95% CI: 8.1 mo-NR) and the DCR was 71% (95% CI: 62%-79%). OS data are immature. Grade (Gr) ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurring in ≥5% of pts were: neutropenia (74.0%), leukopenia (10.7%), hypokalemia (7.3%), anemia (6.7%), hand-foot syndrome (6.0%) and diarrhea (5.3%). Gr 2 alopecia occurred in 11.3% of pts, febrile neutropenia occurred in 4.7% of pts and Gr ≥3 neuropathy occurred in 2.0% of pts. Discontinuation of T and C due to any adverse event occurred in 13.3% of pts. Conclusions: An all-oral regimen of T plus a reduced dose of C demonstrated a high level of antitumor activity in pts with HR+, HER2- MBC not previously treated with a taxane. The confirmed ORR was 51%, median DoR was 9.5 mo and median PFS was 12.9 mo. Neutropenia was the most frequent Gr ≥3 TEAE; the rate of febrile neutropenia was 4.7%. Rates of clinically significant alopecia and neuropathy were low. Clinical trial information: NCT03858972 . Clinical trial information: NCT03858972 .

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207