MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Incorporation of triapine (T) with cisplatin chemoradiation (CRT) for locally advanced cervical and vaginal cancer: Results from NRG-GY006, a phase III randomized trial.

2023· article· en· W4379330365 on OpenAlexaff
Charles A. Leath, Wei Deng, Loren K. Mell, Debra L. Richardson, Joan L. Walker, Laura L. Holman, Jayanthi Lea, Sudha R. Amarnath, Luis Javier Santos-Reyes, Rebecca C. Arend, Jyoti Mayadev, N. Jegadeesh, Paul DiSilvestro, Hye Sook Chon, Sharad Ghamande, Allison Quick, Junzo Chino, Helen Mackay, Carol Aghajanian, Bradley J. Monk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineCervical cancerClinical endpointCisplatinOncologyRibonucleotide reductaseInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialUrologyBrachytherapyTolerabilityInterim analysisCancerChemotherapyRadiation therapyAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5502 Background: Definitive cisplatin-based chemoradiation (CRT) plus brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer (FIGO IB3-IVA) results in sustained survival for 60-70% of patients. Recent studies integrating anti-PD-1 checkpoint immunotherapy (CALLA, NCT03830866) or consolidation chemotherapy (OUTBACK, ACTRN12610000732088) have not demonstrated a survival benefit over CRT. Intrinsic overexpression of ribonucleotide reductase may enhance DNA damage repair due to CRT. We report on the efficacy and tolerability of adding the ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor, triapine, to CRT. Methods: NRG GY006 is a randomized, open-label phase III clinical trial. Eligible patients had FIGO 2009 locally advanced cervical (stages IB2, II, IIIB or IVA without radiographic evidence of para-aortic nodal involvement) or stages II-IV vaginal cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin (40 mg/m2 weekly) with RT 45 Gy + lymph node boost alone (CRT) or CRT in combination with 15 total infusions of triapine (25 mg/m2 IV) Mon/Wed/Fri (CRT + T). Both image guided IMRT or 3D RT were allowed but needed to be specified and pass a rigorous credentialing process. All RT plans had a pre-treatment review with expert planning feedback to the sites. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoint was progression-free survival. Exploratory endpoints included rate of complete metabolic response on post treatment PET/CT imaging at 3 months and knowledge-based planning for image guided IMRT. The target sample was 450 with 127 OS events. The design was to provide 80% power to detect a 10% improvement in OS at 3 years over the control (or HR = 0.6) at 2.5% significance level including one interim futility analysis at 50% information time. Results: Between 1/15/16 and 9/22/22 448 eligible patients were randomized to CRT (n=224) or CRT+T (n=224). The database was locked on 10/18/22 with 69 deaths. Median age was 47 years (range 23-85 years). The majority had cervical cancer (93.3%) and squamous cell carcinoma (82%). 52% had FIGO stage II disease. Racial/ethnic distribution included non-Hispanic white (53.8%), Hispanic/Latina (22.5%), and black (15.2%). IMRT was used in (74.3%) and HDR brachytherapy (98.2%) of cases. No differences in Grade 3-5 toxicities were observed: CRT =52% and CRT +T= 49% with Two G5 toxicities (cardiac arrest and acidosis) in the CRT+T arm. 343 patients have completed all protocol directed therapy. With a median follow-up of 28 months (IQR 15-45 months), the median PFS and OS for both arms were not reached yet. HR for death was 1.018 (95% CI 0.634-1.635), the conditional power was 15% to detect a HR = 0.6 at 100% information time. Conclusions: The addition of triapine to CRT did not improve OS. Clinical trial information: NCT02466971 .

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)0.002
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→