MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Adjuvant infigratinib as targeted therapy for patients with muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma harboring susceptible<i> FGFR3 </i>genetic alterations: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (PROOF 302).

2022· article· en· W4213347865 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Cole, Siamak Daneshmand, Shilpa Gupta, Elan Diamond, Viraj A. Master, Florian Roghmann, Maria De Santis, Raj Satkunasivam, Gautam Jayram, Giuseppe Fornarini, Pierre Frères, María José Méndez-Vidal, Srikala S. Sridhar, Petros Grivas, Joaquim Bellmunt, Sijian Ge, Corina Andresen, Sumanta K. Pal, Seth P. Lerner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCystectomyCisplatinTolerabilityChemotherapyUrologyInternal medicineOncologyBladder cancerPlaceboCancerGastroenterologyAdverse effectPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS580 Background: Radical surgery is the mainstay of treatment for muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC) and urothelial bladder cancer (UBC). However, even when surgery is combined with cisplatin‐based (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, recurrence rates are high. Many patients (pts) are ineligible for, do not respond to, or refuse cisplatin-based chemotherapy because of toxicity concerns. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 ( FGFR3) genetic alterations occur in 21–38% of muscle-invasive UTUC, and in approx. 20% of invasive UBC. Infigratinib (BGJ398) is an ATP-competitive FGFR1–3 selective oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has clinical activity and tolerability in pts with advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) harboring susceptible FGFR3 alterations. PROOF 302 was designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant infigratinib in pts with high-risk, muscle-invasive UC (85% UTUC) and susceptible FGFR3 alterations. Methods: PROOF 302 is a global, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (NCT04197986). Eligible pts have high-risk, muscle-invasive UTUC (85%) or UBC (15%) with susceptible FGFR3 alterations (mutations, gene fusions or rearrangements) confirmed by FoundationOne CDx test, and are ≤120 days following nephroureterectomy, distal ureterectomy, or cystectomy. The study protocol was amended to include pts with carcinoma in situ at surgical margins and those who refuse cisplatin-based chemotherapy (in addition to pts allowed to enroll if ineligible for perioperative cisplatin-based chemotherapy). Eligible pts are M0 and have either disease stage ≥ypT2 and/or yN+ after cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy or ≥pT2 pN0–2 or pN+ (UTUC); and ≥pT3 or pN+ (UBC) if not treated with cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive oral infigratinib 125 mg or placebo QD on days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle for up to 52 weeks (13 cycles) or until recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Primary endpoint: centrally reviewed disease-free survival (DFS) analyzed via stratified log-rank test and Cox model (hazard ratio). Secondary endpoints: investigator-reviewed DFS, metastasis-free survival, overall survival, safety/tolerability. Exploratory endpoints: quality of life, pharmacokinetics, determination of the prevalence of genomic alterations and correlation with features of UC, genomic and proteomic assessment of tumor tissue and cell-free DNA samples from baseline and at recurrence to identify the predictive/prognostic value of biomarkers. PROOF 302 is actively enrolling as of Sep 2021. A second Data Monitoring Committee meeting is planned for Dec 2021. The last pt is expected to complete treatment in 2024. Clinical trial information: NCT04197986.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→