MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Plasma phosphocreatine (PC) as a predictive biomarker for immune checkpoint inhibition in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Analysis of the CCTG CO.26 trial.

2023· article· en· W4318904237 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy Xiaolu, Jonathan M. Loree, Derek J. Jonker, Hagen F. Kennecke, Scott Berry, Félix Couture, Chaudhary E. Ahmad, John R. Goffin, Petr Kavan, Mohammed Harb, Bruce Colwell, Setareh Samimi, Benoit Samson, Tahir Abbas, Nathalie Aucoin, Sheryl Koski, Dongsheng Tu, Christopher J. O’Callaghan, Eric Xueyu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalBausch Health (Canada)Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalJuravinski Cancer CentreCancer Care Nova ScotiaJewish General HospitalHôpital Charles-Le MoyneSt. John’s Health Sciences CentreBC Cancer AgencyHôtel-Dieu de QuébecSaskatchewan Cancer AgencyUniversity Health NetworkOttawa HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreQueen's UniversityMoncton Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioColorectal cancerInternal medicineOncologyBiomarkerRefractory (planetary science)Proportional hazards modelGastroenterologyCancerConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

183 Background: In response to energetic stress, colorectal cancer cells secrete creatine kinase brain-type (CKB). CKB converts creatine and ATP from the extracellular matrix to PC, which is imported intracellularly to sustain survival and metastatic spread. In addition, PC modulates immune cell functions and may play a role in mediating responses to immune checkpoint inhibition. CO.26 was a phase II trial (NCT02870920) that randomized patients (pts) with refractory mCRC to durvalumab plus tremelimumab (D+T) versus best supportive care (BSC). In an exploratory, post-hoc analysis, we investigated the role of plasma PC as a predictive biomarker for response to D+T. Methods: PC concentrations were determined from pre-treatment blood samples with HPLC-tandem mass spectrometer. A minimum p-value approach was used to select an optimum cut-off value which dichotomized patients into low (< 95.6 ng/ml) versus high (≥ 95.6 ng/ml) groups predictive for benefit. Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyze predictive impacts of PC on progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Of 180 pts enrolled, pre-treatment blood samples were available for 162 pts (N =115 for D+T; 47 BSC). Pre-treatment PC was low in 15% (N=24) and high in 85% (N=138). There were no differences in baseline characteristics between pts included in this analysis and the total study pts, or PC low and high pts. D+T improved OS significantly in PC low pts (median OS 4.7 months vs 2.3 months; Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.11 – 0.95, p = 0.03). There was no improvement in PC high pts with D+T (median OS 6.8 vs 5.2 months; HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.55 – 1.17, p = 0.24. Interaction p < 0.0001). Plasma PC values had no impact on PFS and rates of disease control. Conclusions: Pts with low plasma PC derived more benefit from immune checkpoint inhibition with D+T in pts with refractory mCRC. Further prospective validation studies are needed. Predictive analysis for OS with pre-treatment PC levels dichotomized by minimum p approach. [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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207