MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186488369 · doi:10.1016/j.jtho.2021.07.008

Blood First Assay Screening Trial (BFAST) in Treatment-Naive Advanced or Metastatic NSCLC: Initial Results of the Phase 2 ALK-Positive Cohort

2021· article· en· W3186488369 on OpenAlexaff
Rafał Dziadziuszko, Tony Mok, Solange Peters, Ji‐Youn Han, Jorge Alatorre-Alexander, Natasha B. Leighl, Virote Sriuranpong, M. Pérol, Gilberto de Castro, Ernest Nadal, Filippo de Marinis, Osvaldo Arén Frontera, Daniel S.W. Tan, Dae Ho Lee, Hye Ryun Kim, Mark Yan, Todd Riehl, Erica Schleifman, Sarah Paul, Simonetta Mocci, Rajesh Patel, Zoe J. Assaf, David S. Shames, Michael S. Mathisen, Shirish M. Gadgeel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thoracic Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)Princess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersJanssen PharmaceuticalsFoundation MedicineEMD SeronoGenentechG1 TherapeuticsPuma BiotechnologyBayer FundMirati TherapeuticsClovis OncologyMerck Sharp and DohmeTakeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.PfizerIncyteF. Hoffmann-La RocheAbbVieDaiichi-SankyoTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesRocheNovartisSanofiMerckGlaxoSmithKlineEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaBoehringer IngelheimAmgen
KeywordsMedicineAlectinibInternal medicineClinical endpointOncologyCohortAsymptomaticConfidence intervalResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsSurrogate endpointClinical trialPhases of clinical researchCrizotinibLung cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Blood First Assay Screening Trial is an ongoing open-label, multicohort study, prospectively evaluating the relationship between blood-based next-generation sequencing (NGS) detection of actionable genetic alterations and activity of targeted therapies or immunotherapy in treatment-naive advanced or metastatic NSCLC. We present data from the ALK-positive cohort. METHODS: Patients aged more than or equal to 18 years with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and ALK rearrangements detected by blood-based NGS using hybrid capture technology (FoundationACT) received alectinib 600 mg twice daily. Asymptomatic or treated central nervous system (CNS) metastases were permitted. Primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1). Secondary end points were independent review facility-assessed ORR, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and safety. Exploratory end points were investigator-assessed ORR in patients with baseline CNS metastases and relationship between circulating biomarkers and response. RESULTS: In total, 2219 patients were screened and blood-based NGS yielded results in 98.6% of the cases. Of these, 119 patients (5.4%) had ALK-positive disease; 87 were enrolled and received alectinib. Median follow-up was 12.6 months (range: 2.6-18.7). Confirmed ORR was 87.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.5-93.5) by investigator and 92.0% (95% CI: 84.1-96.7) by independent review facility. Investigator-confirmed 12-month duration of response was 75.9% (95% CI: 63.6-88.2). In 35 patients (40%) with baseline CNS disease, investigator-assessed ORR was 91.4% (95% CI: 76.9-98.2). Median PFS was not reached; 12-month investigator-assessed PFS was 78.4% (95% CI: 69.1-87.7). Safety data were consistent with the known tolerability profile of alectinib. CONCLUSIONS: These results reveal the clinical application of blood-based NGS as a method to inform clinical decision-making in ALK-positive NSCLC.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.440 · 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 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

Citations61
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thoracic OncologySame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207