MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387930721 · doi:10.1007/s11523-023-00997-z

A Phase 1b/2 Study of Alpelisib in Combination with Cetuximab in Patients with Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

2023· article· en· W4387930721 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTargeted Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsCetuximabMedicineInternal medicineHead and neck squamous-cell carcinomaOncologyHead and neck cancerPhases of clinical researchCancerClinical trialColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alpelisib in combination with cetuximab showed synergistic anti-tumour activity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) models. OBJECTIVES: The recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was determined in a phase 1b dose-escalation study. Phase 2 evaluated anti-tumour activity with a randomised part in cetuximab-naïve patients and a non-randomised part in cetuximab-resistant patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Alpelisib was administered in 28 d cycles as whole tablets, suspension from crushed tablets or suspension from dispersible tablets in patients with platinum-resistant, recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. RESULTS: The RP2D determined for alpelisib was 300 mg/d. Alpelisib-cetuximab achieved an overall response rate of 25% and 9.9% and disease control rate of 75% and 43.7% in phase 1b and phase 2 studies, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) per central review was 86 d for combination treatment and 87 d for cetuximab monotherapy (unadjusted HR 1.12; 95% CI 0.69-1.82; P > 0.05). When adjusted for baseline covariates [sum of longest diameters from central data, haemoglobin and white blood cell (WBC), the results favoured combination treatment (adjusted HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.30-0.97; P = 0.039). PFS per investigator assessment resulted in an unadjusted HR of 0.76 (95% CI 0.49-1.19; P > 0.05) favouring combination treatment. The median PFS in cetuximab-resistant patients was 3.9 months. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of alpelisib to cetuximab did not demonstrate a PFS benefit in cetuximab-naïve patients with advanced HNSCC. The alpelisib-cetuximab combination showed moderate activity in cetuximab-resistant patients, with a consistent safety profile. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01602315; EudraCT 2011-006017-34.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.304 · 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