MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outcomes of second-line therapies in patients with metastatic de novo small cell prostate cancer (SCPC) and treatment-emergent neuroendocrine prostate cancer (tNEPC).

2022· article· en· W4286296209 on OpenAlexaff
Corbin Eule, Junxiao Hu, Sulaiman M. S. Al‐Saadi, Katharine A. Collier, Patrick James Boland, Rana R. McKay, Vivek Narayan, Dominick Bossé, Amir Mortazavi, Tracy L. Rose, Elaine T. Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeptidase Inhibition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerCancerInternal medicineProstateMetastasisClinical endpointOncologyRadiation therapyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e17022 Background: De novo SCPC and tNEPC in metastatic castrate resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are rare, aggressive cancers with a poor prognosis. After first-line (1L) platinum chemotherapy (PLT), there is no consensus on 2L treatments. This multi-institutional, retrospective study examines practice patterns among clinicians and evaluates the outcomes of patients (pts) with SCPC or tNEPC in the 2L setting. Methods: After IRB approval, pts with a pathologic diagnosis of SCPC or tNEPC (any % of SC or NE histology defined by institutional review) were identified. Pts diagnosed between 2000-2020 who received 1L PLT and any 2L systemic therapy (tx) for SCPC or tNEPC were included. Standardized data collection templates containing demographic, clinical, and pathologic variables were collected. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) to 2L tx. Secondary endpoints included PSA response, time on 2L treatment, and overall survival (OS) from time of 2L tx. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Forty-two pts (21 SCPC, 21 tNEPC) from 6 institutions were included. At SCPC/tNEPC diagnosis, the overall cohort had a median age of 65.0 years (IQR 60.5, 68.0) and median PSA of 3.0 ng/dL (IQR 0.5, 21.8). The most common sites of metastasis included lymph node (78.6%), bone (54.8%), and liver (52.4%). For 1L tx, 37 pts (88.1%) received PLT and 5 (11.9%) had PLT + immunotherapy (IMM). For treatment to the prostate, 21 (51.2%) had none, 7 (17.1%) radiation (RT), 9 (22.0%) surgery, 3 (7.3%) RT + surgery, and 1 (2.4%) brachytherapy alone. Concurrent ADT was given to 32 pts (76.2%) in the 1L and 2L. At last follow-up, 34 pts (81.0%) were dead, 4 (9.5%) were alive, and 4 (9.5%) were lost to follow-up/censored. For 2L tx, 10 pts (23.8%) received PLT, 8 (19.0%) taxane monotherapy (TAX), 10 (23.8%) IMM, 8 (19.0%) other chemotherapy (CHX), and 6 (14.3%) other tx. Among 38 pts evaluable for response, the ORR was 15.8% (6 pts with PR: 4 PLT, 1 IMM, 1 CHX). PSA response ≥ 50% to 2L tx was seen in 5 of 29 pts with PSA data (17.2%). Other outcomes data are reported in Table. Conclusions: In this retrospective study, pts with SCPC or tNEPC who reached 2L tx received a wide variety of treatment regimens, reflecting the lack of consensus in this tx setting. ORR was low and overall prognosis was poor in the 2L regardless of tx choice. Pts on 2L immunotherapy seemed to have the shortest mOS. [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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 OncologySame topicPeptidase Inhibition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207