Combination of Osimertinib and Olaparib Therapy to Treat Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and High-Grade Serous Ovarian Carcinoma: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the case of a 75-year-old female with simultaneous EGFR-mutated stage IV lung cancer and advanced BRCA2-mutated ovarian cancer, treated with a unique regimen. In this case report, the patient was treated with alternating months of osimertinib and olaparib to control her lung and ovarian cancers, respectively. When both diseases showed progression, the patient underwent a trial of concurrent therapy with both drugs, yet this was discontinued due to patient-reported adverse side effects. Combination targeted drug therapy may be required to treat complex diagnoses such as dual malignancies. However, combination drug therapy consisting of osimertinib and olaparib has not previously been explored. This case report represents the first to demonstrate osimertinib and olaparib combination therapy as a unique treatment regimen for concurrent lung and ovarian cancers. These two drugs can either be given in an alternating way or given together, short-term, with a higher but tolerable toxicity profile.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".