Updated Integrated Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Entrectinib in Patients With <i>NTRK</i> Fusion-Positive Solid Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Entrectinib potently inhibits tropomyosin receptor kinases (TRKAs)/B/C and ROS1, and previously induced deep [objective response rate (ORR) 57.4%] and durable [median duration of response (DoR) 10.4 months] responses in adults with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumors from three phase I/II trials. This article expands prior reports with additional patients and longer follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced/metastatic NTRK fusion-positive solid tumors and ≥12 months' follow-up were included. Primary endpoints were ORR and DoR by blinded independent central review (BICR); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), intracranial efficacy, and safety. The safety-evaluable populations included all patients who had received ≥1 entrectinib dose. RESULTS: At clinical cut-off (August 31, 2020), the efficacy-evaluable population comprised 121 adults with 14 tumor types and ≥30 histologies. Median follow-up was 25.8 months; 61.2% of patients had a complete (n = 19) or partial response (n = 55). Median DoR was 20.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 13.0-38.2]; median PFS was 13.8 months (95% CI, 10.1-19.9). In 11 patients with BICR-assessed measurable central nervous system (CNS) disease, intracranial ORR was 63.6% (95% CI, 30.8-89.1) and median intracranial DoR was 22.1 (95% CI, 7.4-not estimable) months. The safety profile of entrectinib in adults and pediatric patients was aligned with previous reports. Most treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1/2 and manageable/reversible with dose modifications. TRAE-related discontinuations occurred in 8.3% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: With additional clinical experience, entrectinib continues to demonstrate durable systemic and intracranial responses and can address the unmet need of a CNS-active treatment in patients with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".