MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Darolutamide and time to pain progression by disease volume in ARASENS.

2023· article· en· W4379281682 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew R. Smith, Bertrand Tombal, Fred Saad, Karim Fizazi, Cora N. Sternberg, E. David Crawford, Jeanny B. Aragon‐Ching, Martin Schostak, Ronald Tutrone, Ateesha F. Mohamed, Natasha Littleton, Rui Li, Shankar Srinivasan, Maha Hussain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDocetaxelInternal medicineHazard ratioProstate cancerPlaceboOncologyConfidence intervalCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e17075 Background: In ARASENS (NCT02799602), darolutamide (DARO) + androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) + docetaxel significantly reduced risk of death by 32.5% (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI[ 0.57–0.80; P< 0.0001) and significantly delayed time to pain progression (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66–0.95; P= 0.006) vs placebo (PBO) + ADT + docetaxel in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). We report time to pain progression in patients (pts) with high/low disease volume (HV/LV). Methods: Pts with mHSPC were randomized to oral DARO 600 mg twice daily or PBO, both + ADT + docetaxel. Pain was assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory short form “pain at its worst” score (WPS). Pain progression was defined as WPS increase ≥2 points from nadir (and absolute WPS ≥4 if > 0 at baseline) or initiation of opioid therapy for ≥7 consecutive days. A sensitivity analysis assessed pain progression after completion of docetaxel. HV/LV subgroups were defined per CHAARTED. Results: 1305 pts (DARO 651, PBO 654) were analyzed. At baseline, the mean WPS was 1.5 (standard deviation 1.9) vs 1.4 (1.8) in the DARO vs PBO groups; 258 (40%) vs 274 (42%) pts had no pain (WPS 0). DARO + ADT + docetaxel had a robust impact on delaying time to pain progression vs PBO + ADT + docetaxel in the post-docetaxel sensitivity analysis (stratified HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62–0.90) and in the HV subgroup (unstratified HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.61–0.93) (Table). Overall, median time to pain progression was longer in the LV vs HV subgroup. WPS change from nadir was the main driver of pain progression events. Conclusions: In pts with mHSPC, the addition of DARO to ADT and docetaxel provided clinically meaningful benefit through delayed time to pain progression, notably in pts with HV disease. Increased overall survival, a delay in time to pain progression, and a favorable safety profile set DARO + ADT + docetaxel as a new standard of care for pts with mHSPC. Clinical trial information: NCT02799602 . [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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.437 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207