MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase II study of maintenance therapy with temsirolimus (TEM) after response to first-line docetaxel (TAX) chemotherapy in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).

2011· article· en· W4248307030 on OpenAlexaff
Urban Emmenegger, Scott R. Berry, Christopher M. Booth, Srikala S. Sridhar, Eric Winquist, Nesan Bandali, Annie Chow, Robert S. Kerbel, Yunmi Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreLondon Health Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical endpointTemsirolimusDocetaxelProstate cancerInternal medicineOncologyEverolimusChemotherapyUrologyCancerPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayClinical trialDiscovery and development of mTOR inhibitors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

160 Background: TAX is the standard first-line chemotherapy for CRPC. However, a number of questions remain regarding the optimal use of TAX following maximal response. Aside from intermittent TAX, maintenance therapy with well-tolerated agents such as the mTOR inhibitor TEM could be one strategy to prolong treatment response and the chemotherapy-free interval, without significantly compromising quality of life. In fact, the mTOR pathway is involved in many aspects of CRPC, and mTOR inhibitors have demonstrated significant anti-CRPC activity in preclinical testing. Methods: CRPC pts eligible for this single-arm, multicenter phase II trial must have received between 6 to 8 cycles of first-line TAX (75 mg/m2 q3wks) with documented treatment response by PSA (>50% decline from baseline) or RECIST criteria. 30 pts will be enrolled and administered weekly TEM (25 mg iv × 4/cycle). The primary endpoint is time to treatment failure (TTF, by RECIST or symptomatic progression). Secondary endpoints include safety (NCI-CTCAE v3.0), quality of life (FACT-P, PPI), changes in PSA doubling time and time to PSA progression, objective tumor response rate (RECIST), and overall survival. We will also study correlative endpoints using plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (i.e., markers of mTOR inhibition, of antiangiogenic TEM effects and of intratumoral hypoxia/acidosis, the latter as potential predictive markers). Results: 10 pts have been enrolled to date: mean age 68 (range 52-80), prior definitive local therapy (7)—radiation (6), prostatectomy (1), mean PSA at entry 99.28 (2.3- 380.7), ECOG 0 (4) or 1 (6), prior cycles of TAX 6 (6) or 8 (4), sites of metastasis—bone (8), lymph nodes (4), visceral (3). 6 pts have been discontinued due to treatment failure after a mean of 5.3±1.9 cycles (range 3-8) - RECIST (1), symptomatic (2), combined (3). 4 pts are on cycle 1-2-8-9, respectively. TEM has been generally well tolerated without unexpected side-effects, but may have contributed to worsening lymphedema in 1 pt. Conclusions: TEM maintenance therapy in CRPC pts that have responded to first-line TAX is well tolerated and appears to result in meaningful TTF. 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 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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→