MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225994592 · doi:10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100324

Clinical Outcomes With Dabrafenib Plus Trametinib in a Clinical Trial Versus Real-World Standard of Care in Patients With BRAF-Mutated Advanced NSCLC

2022· article· en· W4225994592 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce E. Johnson, Christina S. Baik, Julien Mazières, Harry J.M. Groen, Barbara Melosky, Jürgen Wolf, Fatemeh Asad Zadeh Vosta Kolaei, Wen-Hsing Wu, Stefanie Knoll, Meryem Ktiouet Dawson, Adam Johns, David Planchard

Bibliographic record

VenueJTO Clinical and Research Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMelanoma and MAPK Pathways
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMerck Sharp and DohmeRocheNovartisAmgenPfizerLes Laboratories Pierre FabreNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationAstraZenecaTakeda Pharmaceutical CompanyEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsDabrafenibHazard ratioMedicineTrametinibInternal medicineOncologyConfidence intervalProportional hazards modelVemurafenibCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction BRAF mutations are rare in patients with NSCLC, and treatment options are limited. Dabrafenib plus trametinib (dab-tram) was approved for BRAF V600 -mutated advanced NSCLC (aNSCLC), based on results from a phase 2 study (NCT01336634). This retrospective analysis compared the effectiveness of dab-tram, based on previously reported clinical trial data, versus real-world standard of care in patients with BRAF -mutated aNSCLC. Methods Real-world cohorts were derived from a deidentified real-world database (2011–2020) and included patients with BRAF -mutated aNSCLC receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC), first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus PBC, or second-line ICIs. Weighting by odds was used to estimate the average treatment effect of the treated. Results For first-line dab-tram versus PBC, the hazard ratio (HR; 95% confidence interval) for death in unweighted and weighted analyses was 0.65 (0.39–1.1) and 0.51 (0.29–0.92; p = 0.03), respectively; unweighted and weighted median overall survival was 17.3 (12.3–40.2) versus 14.5 (9.2–19.6) months and 17.3 (14.6-not reached) versus 9.7 (6.4–19.6) months, respectively. Hazard ratio of death in unweighted and weighted analyses was 0.56 (0.29–1.1) and 0.57 (0.28–1.17), respectively, with first-line dab-tram versus PBC plus ICI, and 0.65 (0.39–1.07) and not reported (Cox proportional-hazards assumption violated), respectively, with second-line dab-tram versus ICI. Conclusions In this indirect comparison in patients with BRAF -mutated aNSCLC, the risk of death was lower and median overall survival was longer with first-line dab-tram versus PBC. In analyses of dab-tram versus first-line PBC plus ICI or second-line ICI, sample sizes were small and findings were inconclusive with overlapping confidence intervals. Despite some limitations, the study provides useful data for this rare patient population.

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)0.004
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJTO Clinical and Research ReportsSame topicMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysFrench-language works237,207