MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Characterization of tumor responses in patients (pts) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) treated with lenvatinib in REFLECT.

2022· article· en· W4281639573 on OpenAlexaff
Masatoshi Kudo, Shukui Qin, Fabio Piscaglia, Arndt Vogel, T.R. Jeffry Evans, Jennifer J. Knox, Carlos López, Zahra Ramji, Min Ren, Kalgi Mody, Richard S. Finn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLenvatinibMedicineHazard ratioHepatocellular carcinomaSorafenibResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsInternal medicineOncologyGastroenterologyNuclear medicineConfidence intervalProgressive diseaseChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4078 Background: In REFLECT, lenvatinib was noninferior to sorafenib based on overall survival in pts with uHCC (median 13.6 vs 12.3 mos; hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.79–1.06). The objective response rate (ORR) with lenvatinib was 18.8% by blinded independent imaging review (IIR) per RECIST v1.1; ORR was 40.6% by blinded IIR per mRECIST. Here we further characterize the tumor responses in pts with uHCC who were treated with lenvatinib in REFLECT. Methods: Assessments of ORR included all pts randomly assigned to lenvatinib treatment (12 mg/day for bodyweight ≥60 kg or 8 mg/day for bodyweight <60 kg). Time to first objective response (TTR) and duration of response (DOR) were calculated among pts who achieved a partial or complete tumor response. Tumors were assessed by IIR per RECIST v1.1 or mRECIST. Median DOR was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method; 95% CI was estimated with a generalized Brookmeyer and Crowley method. Results: 478 Pts were randomly assigned to receive lenvatinib. Among the 90 pts (18.8%) who achieved an objective response by IIR per RECIST v1.1, median TTR was 2.8 mos (range 1–29) and median DOR was 7.4 mos (95% CI 5.6–9.2). Of the 194 pts who had an objective response by IIR per mRECIST, median TTR was 1.9 mos (range 1–15) and median DOR was 7.3 mos (95% CI 5.6–7.4). ORRs by selected baseline characteristics are reported in the Table. Notably, among responders by IIR per RECIST v1.1 (n=90), median overall survival (by Simon-Makuch method) was 23.4 mos (95% CI 17.6–26.3), median duration of treatment was 10.3 mos, and 65.6% of pts experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events. Conclusions: Pts with uHCC treated with lenvatinib achieved objective responses with a similar frequency to those seen with single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors. These responses occurred irrespective of baseline characteristics. Tumor responses occurred early and were durable. Clinical trial information: NCT01761266. [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 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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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