MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On-treatment plasma ctDNA fraction and treatment outcomes in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

2022· article· en· W4286299170 on OpenAlexaff
Sofie H. Tolmeijer, Emmy Boerrigter, Takayuki Sumiyoshi, Sarah W.S. Ng, Edmond M. Kwan, Matti Annala, Inge M. van Oort, Jack A. Schalken, Nielka P. van Erp, Alexander W. Wyatt, Niven Mehra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerInternal medicineOncologyProspective cohort studyProgression-free survivalCancerOverall survivalUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5051 Background: Androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPI) are standard of care for treatment-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), but primary or rapidly acquired resistance is common. Early identification of resistant disease is critical for improving management strategies. We investigated whether on-treatment changes in plasma ctDNA fraction (ctDNA%; the proportion of cell-free DNA that is tumor-derived) associate with ARPI treatment outcomes. Methods: We collected serial plasma cell-free DNA from 81 patients with mCRPC: at baseline and following 4 weeks of treatment during two prospective multi-center observational studies (NCT02426333; NCT02471469). CtDNA% was calculated by integrating deep targeted and shallow whole-genome sequencing. Samples were dichotomized at above and below 1%, and designated as high or low ctDNA%, respectively. Outcome measurements were radiographic and/or clinical progression-free survival (rcPFS) and overall survival (OS). Non-durable responses were defined as rcPFS < 6 months, excluding patients with PSA progression alone (n = 3) or treatment cessation for toxicity (n = 4). Results: Median follow-up was 27.4 months (IQR 17.7-34.9). CtDNA% was high in 47/81 (58%) patients at baseline and 29/81 (36%) patients at 4 weeks. The median ctDNA% for patients with high ctDNA was 15.0% (IQR 4.9-43.8%) at baseline and 5.0% (IQR 2.0-20.6%) at 4 weeks. High baseline ctDNA% was prognostic for rcPFS and OS (Table). RcPFS and OS was shortest for patients that retained high ctDNA% at 4 weeks. However, patients converting from high to low ctDNA% at 4 weeks did not experience different outcomes to patients with low ctDNA at both timepoints. ctDNA% associations with rcPFS and OS were independent of established clinical prognostic factors. 23/27 (85%) patients experiencing non-durable responses had high ctDNA% at baseline and 4 weeks. Only 3/47 patients (6%) experiencing durable responses had high ctDNA% at both timepoints. Sensitivity and specificity for predicting non-durable response was 85% and 94%, respectively. Conclusions: Early changes in ctDNA% are strongly linked to duration of first-line ARPI treatment benefit in mCRPC and may have utility for informing clinical trials testing early therapy switches in patients unlikely to experience durable disease responses. Clinical trial information: NCT02426333; NCT02471469. [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 score0.005

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207