MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393085499 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2024-5911

Abstract 5911: <i>In vivo</i> efficacy of a novel peptide-conjugated drug in patient-derived xenograft models of breast cancer

2024· article· en· W4393085499 on OpenAlexaff
Mitchell J. Elliott, Meghan Mcguire, Jennifer Silvester, Chantal Tobin, Samah El Ghamrasni, Francine E. Lui, Andrew Zhai, Özge Yoluk, Aron Broom, Tracy A. Stone, Glenn L. Butterfoss, Serban Popa, Tianyu Lu, Chris Ing, DAVID O. WHITE, David W. Cescon

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsApotex (Canada)Princess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn vivoMedicineBreast cancerCancerDrugConjugated systemCancer researchPeptideOncologyInternal medicinePharmacologyBiologyChemistryBiochemistryBiotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Antibody and peptide-conjugated drugs are rapidly entering the clinic for the treatment of patients with early and advanced breast cancer. These drugs are designed to achieve more targeted delivery of cytotoxic agents to tumor cells with robust clinical activity. ARB-1-6, a sortilin (SORT1) targeted peptide conjugated to the cytotoxic agent MMAE, has demonstrated pre-clinical activity and tolerability in cell line xenografts of breast cancer. To further characterize its spectrum of antitumor activity and biomarker correlates we evaluated ARB-1-6 in a collection of clinically and genomically annotated breast cancer patient-derived xenografts (PDX). Methods: Breast cancer PDX models were generated and propagated under IRB approved protocols [14-8358]. ARB-1-6 was dosed in tumor-bearing SCID mice by tail vein injection at 3 mg/kg weekly x 4 doses. Tumor volume was measured twice weekly until day 35 or until models reached humane endpoints, after which tumors were collected. Animals were weighed regularly and assessed for treatment-related toxicity. Results: 7 models (5 TN and 2 HR) have completed efficacy assessment to date. 3/7 models were derived from treatment naïve patients while 4/7 were derived from pre-treated patients (Table 1). Complete response (mRECIST) was seen in 5/7 (71.4%) models with stable disease occurring in 2/7 (28.6%). ARB-1-6 was well tolerated with no weight loss observed. Complete tumor regression was seen in a PDX derived from a patient with clinical resistance to a TROP2 antibody drug conjugate (ADC). Antitumor activity was observed in models with low SORT1 RNA expression; SORT1 IHC and other correlatives studies are underway. Conclusion: ARB-1-6 demonstrates substantial preclinical activity in PDX models at doses that are well tolerated in mice. Treatment of additional models is ongoing. Full results and correlative analyses including relationships between antitumor activity and target protein expression will be presented. PDX Model Characteristics and Patient Treatment PDX Subtype Pt. Treatment 1 TN AC-T 2 TN FEC-D, Gem+Carbo 3 TN AC-T 4 TN No 5 TN No 6 HR No 7 HR TC, ET, Cape, Gem+Cis, TROP2-ADC Citation Format: Mitchell J. Elliott, Meghan Mcguire, Jennifer Silvester, Chantal Tobin, Samah El Ghamrasni, Francine Lui, Andrew Zhai, Ozge Yoluk, Aron Broom, Tracy Stone, Glenn Butterfoss, Serban Popa, Tianyu Lu, Chris Ing, David White, David W. Cescon. In vivo efficacy of a novel peptide-conjugated drug in patient-derived xenograft models of breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 5911.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207