MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Building a predictive model for outcomes with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer using VISION data: Preliminary results.

2024· article· en· W4391302647 on OpenAlexaff
Ken Herrmann, Andrei Gafita, Johann S. de Bono, Oliver Sartor, Kim N., Bernd J. Krause, Kambiz Rahbar, Scott T. Tagawa, Johannes Czernin, Ghassan El‐Haddad, Connie Wong, Zhaojie Zhang, Celine Wilke, Osvaldo Mirante, Michael J. Morris, Karim Fizazi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMedical Research CouncilNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerOncologyCastrationInternal medicineCancerHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

208 Background: 177Lu-PSMA-617 is approved in adults with PSMA+ metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This analysis of VISION data sought to build predictive models for clinical outcomes after 177Lu-PSMA-617. Methods: In VISION, adults with PSMA+ mCRPC received 177Lu-PSMA-617 (7.4 GBq every 6 weeks, ≤6 cycles) plus protocol-permitted standard of care (SoC) or SoC alone. In this post hoc analysis, 29 baseline parameters were assessed for prognostic and predictive value on overall survival (OS), radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) and PSA response (≥50% reduction; PSA50). Parameters associated with outcome regardless of treatment were prognostic, and those associated with outcome after treatment with 177Lu-PSMA-617+SoC vs SoC were predictive. Cox proportional hazards (OS and rPFS) or logistic regression (PSA50) models were used in univariate analyses for parameter selection and to build statistical models. Here, univariate analyses are presented. Multiplicity was corrected by use of q values (α = 0.05). Results: Data from 831 adults were analyzed. In initial univariate analyses, 76%, 69% and 38% of parameters assessed were prognostic for OS, rPFS and PSA50, respectively; fewer were predictive of better outcomes after 177Lu-PSMA-617+SoC vs SoC (subset shown). Conclusions: Baseline prognostic and predictive parameters were identified for OS, as well as for rPFS and PSA50, in adults with mCRPC in VISION receiving 177Lu-PSMA-617+SoC or SoC alone. For clinical application, select parameters will be reassessed categorically, and multivariate predictive models will be developed using identified parameters and parameter shrinkage. [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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→