Real‐world experience of tyrosine kinase inhibitors in children, adolescents and adults with relapsed or refractory bone tumours: A Canadian Sarcoma Research and Clinical Collaboration (<scp>CanSaRCC</scp>) study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We conducted a retrospective multi-centre study to assess the real-world outcome of regorafenib (REGO) and cabozantinib (CABO) in recurrent/refractory bone tumours (BTs) including osteosarcoma (OST), Ewing sarcoma (EWS) and chondrosarcoma (CS)/extra-skeletal mesenchymal CS (ESMC). METHODS: After regulatory approval, data from patients with recurrent BT (11 institutions) were extracted from CanSaRCC (Canadian Sarcoma Research and Clinical Collaboration) database. Patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes were collected. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: From July 2018 to May 2022, 66 patients received REGO or CABO; 39 OST, 18 EWS, 4 CS and 5 ESMC. Median age was 27.8 years (range 12-76); median starting dose was 60 mg for CABO (n = 37, range 40-60) and 120 mg for REGO (n = 29, range 40-160). Twenty-eight (42.4%) patients required dose reduction: hand-foot syndrome 7 (10.6%), nausea/vomiting 1 (1.5%), diarrhoea 1 (1.5%), 2 elevated LFTs (3%), elevated bilirubin 1 (1.5%) and mucositis 1 (1.5%). The median OS for patients with OST, EWS, CS and ESMC was 8.5 months (n = 39, 95% CI 7-13.1); 13.4 months (n = 18, 95% CI 3.4-27.2), 8.1 (n = 4, 95% CI 4.1-9.3) and 18.2 (n = 5, 95% CI (10.4-na), respectively. Median PFS for OST, EWS, CS and ECMS was 3.5 (n = 39, 95% CI 2.8-5), 3.9 (n = 18, 95% CI 2.1-5.9), 5.53 (n = 4. 95% CI 2.13-NA) and 11.4 (n = 5, 95% CI 1.83-14.7), respectively. Age, line of therapy, REGO versus CABO, or time from diagnosis to initiation of TKI were not associated with PFS on univariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Our real-world data show that TKIs have meaningful activity in recurrent BT with acceptable toxicities when started at modified dosing. Inclusion of TKIs in earlier lines of treatment and/or maintenance therapy could be questions for future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".