MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Phase I trial of sorafenib in high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients after liver transplantation.

2013· article· en· W4253674318 on OpenAlexaff
Abby B. Siegel, Anthony B. El-Khoueiry, Richard S. Finn, Charles Davic Blanke, Rosa Hidalgo, Robert S. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatocellular carcinomaSorafenibInternal medicineNeutropeniaLiver transplantationMilan criteriaGastroenterologyTransplantationSurgeryChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

280 Background: LT offers long-term survival for HCC patients within the Milan criteria. For those outside, rates of recurrence are higher. There are no known treatments which decrease risk of recurrence post-transplant. We began a multicenter Phase I study of sorafenib in high-risk HCC patients after LT. Methods: Eligible subjects had pathologically proven HCC that was either (1) outside Milan (pre- or post-transplant), (2) poorly differentiated (Edmondson and Steiner grade 4), or (3) had vascular invasion at explant. We used a standard phase I dose-escalation design, beginning drug between 4 and 16 weeks after LT, with a planned duration of treatment of 6 months. Cohort dosages are as follows: (1) 200 mg q day (6 enrolled), (2) 200 mg BID (3 enrolled), (3) 200 mg/400 mg (3 enrolled), and (4) 400 mg BID. Correlative studies include circulating endothelial cells (CECs) and plasma biomarkers which are being collected prior to treatment, at 1 month, and at recurrence. Results: We have enrolled 12 patients, 11 are reported here. Mean age is 62; 64% had underlying HCV, 27% HBV, and 9% ETOH. 45% were outside Milan based on preoperative imaging. On explant, 36% had high grade pathology, and 18% had vascular invasion. Grade 3-4 toxicities seen in >10% include: cytopenias (27% neutropenia), LFT abnormalities (T. bili 18%), HTN (18%), and diarrhea (18%). We are currently enrolling at the 3rd dose level. We had 1 episode acute rejection at the 3rd dose level. CEC data are available for 8 patients, with a baseline range from 15-91, and 1 month range from 2-254. Mean follow up time is 18.0 months. 3 patients have recurred, one who was on drug for < 1 month. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the only ongoing multicenter Phase I trial of sorafenib in the post-transplant setting in the US. Post-transplant sorafenib for high-risk patients is feasible, and toxicity has been manageable for the most part. DLT has not yet been defined. Clinical trial information: NCT00997022.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis→French-language works237,207→