MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The international penile advanced cancer trial (InPACT): The first phase III trial for squamous carcinoma of the penis with regional lymph node metastases.

2022· article· en· W4213037612 on OpenAlexaffabout
Curtis A. Pettaway, Steve Nicholson, Philippe E. Spiess, Lance C. Pagliaro, Nick Watkin, Jim Barber, Michael A. Carducci, Edouard J. Trabulsi, Juanita Crook, Mark Rosen, Peter Branney, Jon Oxley, Lucinda Billingham, Stephanie Burnett, Steven Penegar, Christina Yap, Emma Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UK
KeywordsMedicinePenile cancerLymph nodeChemoradiotherapyNeoadjuvant therapyRadiation therapyOncologyDissection (medical)CancerInternal medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS7 Background: Penis cancer is a rare but potentially fatal disease. A limited body of evidence exists on which to base the majority of management decisions for patients with regional nodal metastases. Five-year survival for patients with a single involved inguinal lymph node treated with surgery alone is approximately 80%, whilst it ranges from 0 to 12% for patients with pelvic node involvement (N3). Additional strategies are required for the management regionally-advanced disease. InPACT (NCT02305654) aims to determine prospectively the relative benefits and sequencing of surgery, chemotherapy, and chemoradiotherapy in the management of patients with penis cancer who present with palpable or radiologically evident inguinal lymph node metastases. InPACT addresses the following questions: Is there a role for neoadjuvant therapy and, if so, which of the two options (chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) before surgery gives superior outcomes? Among patients whose inguinal node histology predicts a high risk of recurrence, does prophylactic pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) plus chemoradiation to the inguinal and pelvic fields improve survival compared to chemoradiation alone? Methods: A Bayesian trial design aims to include a wide population of patients and incorporates two randomisations: InPACT-neoadjuvant and InPACT-pelvis. Participants are stratified by disease burden (extent of nodal involvement), by the presence or absence of high-risk radiological features, and by GFR. Participants with high disease burden where neoadjuvant treatment is thought to be indicated are randomised to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Participants with intermediate disease burden are randomised to one of 3 arms: Surgery alone or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to surgery. Participants in the low-burden group proceed directly to surgery. Participants with postoperative inguinal node pathology that shows high-risk features may then proceed to InPACT-pelvis where randomisation is between adjuvant chemoradiotherapy ± PLND for those not previously treated with chemoradiotherapy & between PLND & observation for those previously treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The study aims to recruit 200 participants. The primary outcome measure is overall survival, with secondary outcome measures of disease-specific survival, disease-free survival, and freedom from locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. Feasibility, toxicity, the type/extent of surgical complications, and quality of life will be assessed as secondary endpoints for all the InPACT treatment arms. To October 2021, 65 participants have been recruited with centres open in the UK, US and Canada. Clinical trial information: NCT02305654.

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)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207