Apalutamide for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer in East Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ethnicity might be associated with treatment outcomes in advanced prostate cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) combined with apalutamide in East Asians with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). The original phase 3 Targeted Investigational Treatment Analysis of Novel Anti-androgen (TITAN) trial was conducted at 260 sites in 23 countries. This subgroup analysis included patients enrolled in 62 participating centers in China, Japan, and Korea. Radiographic progression-free survival (PFS), time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression, and PSA changes from baseline were compared between groups in the East Asian population. The intent-to-treat East Asian population included 111 and 110 participants in the apalutamide and placebo groups, respectively. The 24-month radiographic PFS rates were 76.1% and 52.3% in the apalutamide and placebo groups, respectively (apalutamide vs placebo: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.506; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.302-0.849; P = 0.009). Median time to PSA progression was more favorable with apalutamide than placebo (HR = 0.210; 95% CI, 0.124-0.357; P < 0.001). Median maximum percentages of PSA decline from baseline were 99.0% and 73.9% in the apalutamide and placebo groups, respectively. The most common adverse event (AE) was rash in the apalutamide group, with a higher rate than that in the placebo group (37.3% vs 9.1%). The most common grade 3 or 4 AEs were rash (12 [10.9%]) and hypertension (12 [10.9%]) for apalutamide. The efficacy and safety of apalutamide in the East Asian subgroup of the TITAN trial are consistent with the global results.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".