Population-based analysis of a novel prognostic model for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients (pts) treated with abiraterone acetate (AA).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
29 Background: Using data from the COU-AA-301 trial, a novel prognostic model was recently developed for predicting overall survival (OS) in post-chemotherapy mCRPC pts treated with AA (J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl; abstr 5013)). The model is comprised of six pre-treatment risk-factors (RF) associated with poor outcome: ECOG performance status (PS) ≥ 2, presence of visceral metastases, time from start of LHRH agonists to start of AA ≤ 36 months, low albumin, high ALP and high LDH. The aim of this study was to evaluate this model in an unselected population-based cohort. Methods: Cancer registries at three Canadian centers were used to identify mCRPC pts treated with AA. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression was used to determine independent prognostic factors for OS. Results: A total of 415 pts received AA – 286 were post-docetaxel and 129 were chemotherapy-naïve. In post-docetaxel pts, 21%, 50% and 28% were classified into good (0-1 RF), intermediate (2-3 RF) and poor (4-6 RF) prognosis (prog) groups respectively based on the COU-AA-301 model. Median OS in the post-docetaxel cohort was significantly longer for pts with good prog disease (23.9 months) compared to intermediate (17.6 months) and poor prog pts (8.4 months) (Table). ECOG PS (p<0.001), LDH (p=0.025), albumin (p=0.007) and visceral metastases (p<0.001) were confirmed as independent prognostic factors. Although the number of events in chemotherapy-naïve pts was low, median OS was significantly longer in good prog pts (not reached) compared to both intermediate (22.9 months; p=0.011, log-rank) and poor prog pts (10.3 months; p<0.001, log-rank). Conclusions: In a population-based setting, our data validate the COU-AA-301 model as a tool for prognostic stratification of mCRPC pts treated with AA after docetaxel. Prospective evaluation of this prognostic model in post-docetaxel and docetaxel-naive pts commencing AA is warranted. [Table: see text]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".