Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer: Updated survival of the TAX 327 study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
5005 Background: The TAX-327 study compared 3 weekly docetaxel (D3), weekly docetaxel (D1) or mitoxantrone (M), each with prednisone (P) for 1006 patients (pts) with metastatic hormone resistant prostate cancer (mHRPC). The original analysis, undertaken in August 2003 when 557 deaths had occurred, showed significantly better survival and response rates for pain, PSA and quality of life for D3 when compared with M (Tannock et al, NEJM 2004;351:1502–12). Here we present the updated survival analysis. Methods: Investigators were asked to provide date of death or last follow up for all patients alive in August 2003. Results: By December 2007 data on 276 additional deaths were obtained (total 833 deaths, see Table ). The survival benefit of D3 as compared with M has persisted with extended follow up while D1 continues to show no significant survival advantage. More patients (17.9% and 16.7%) survived =3 years in the D3 and D1 arms compared to M (13.7%). Similar trends in survival between treatment arms were seen for pts above and below 65 years of age, for those with and without pain at baseline, and for those with baseline PSA above and below median value of 115ng/ml. Conclusions: The present analysis confirms previous findings that survival is significantly longer with D3 than with M. Survival update is ongoing. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".