MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dose escalation for mitigating diarrhea: Ranked tolerability assessment of anti-diarrheal regimens in patients receiving neratinib for early-stage breast cancer.

2021· article· en· W3167895093 on OpenAlexaff
Gavin Marx, A. Jo Chien, José Á. García-Sáenz, Arlene Chan, Manuel Ruíz‐Borrego, Carlos H. Bárcenas, Michael P. Thirlwell, Maureen Trudeau, Ron Bose, Daniel Egle, Barbara Pistilli, Johanna Wassermann, Kerry Cheong, D. Semsek, Christian F. Singer, Daniel Hunt, Utpal Khambholja, Feng Xu, Naisargee Shah, Adam Brufsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTolerabilityNeratinibDiarrheaInternal medicineAdverse effectLoperamideCohortRegimenMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerGastroenterologyOncologyCancerTrastuzumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

536 Background: The primary tolerability concern with neratinib (NERLYNX®; N), an irreversible pan-HER tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is diarrhea. Data from the multi-cohort, open-label, phase 2 CONTROL trial [Barcenas et al. Ann Oncol 2020] demonstrated significant improvement in grade 3 diarrhea and diarrhea-related discontinuations vs the ExteNET trial, which did not mandate anti-diarrheal prophylaxis. We report a systematic analysis of tolerability in CONTROL and ExteNET. Methods: Patients (pts) ≥18y with stage I–IIIc HER2+ breast cancer received N (240 mg/d po for 1y) after trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy and were enrolled sequentially into cohorts assessing different modalities to mitigate diarrhea. Cohorts with complete data were included: loperamide (L); L+budesonide (BL); L+colestipol (CL); CL as needed (CL-PRN); and N dose escalation (DE; 120 mg/d on d1–7, 160 mg/d on d8–14, and 240 mg/d thereafter). Integrated ranking (IR) analysis was performed on 13 endpoints in 4 domains (exposure, diarrhea, adverse events [AEs], quality of life [QoL]) identified with input from clinicians; cohorts were ranked from 1 (best) to 5 (worst). Index scores (IS) based on individual pt data from CONTROL were calculated as supportive analysis to confirm selection of the regimen with best overall tolerability, which was then compared with ExteNET. Results: Of the 5 CONTROL cohorts evaluated, DE ranked best for most endpoints. Average ranks per IR method: L 3.4; BL 3.2; CL 3.0; CL-PRN 3.3; DE 2.0. The IS analysis supported DE as the cohort with best overall tolerability. Comparison of CONTROL DE vs ExteNET showed improvement in tolerability in all domains (table). Conclusions: These analyses suggest superiority of weekly DE vs other anti-diarrheal strategies. A lower rate of grade 3 diarrhea was observed with CONTROL DE vs ExteNET (13.3 vs 39.9%, respectively), as well as a comparable or improved AE profile. The data also reveal greater compliance with N (fewer early discontinuations, longer treatment duration, higher cumulative dose) and reduced impact on QoL with DE, suggesting improved tolerability. Clinical trial information: NCT02400476. [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 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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207