MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Real-world safety and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) of lurbinectedin (lurbi) in patients (pts) with small cell lung cancer (SCLC): Jazz EMERGE 402 updated analysis.

2024· article· en· W4399280225 on OpenAlexaffabout
Firas Badin, Philip E. Lammers, Mehul P. Patel, Leonid Shunyakov, Dennis Slater, Catherine Labbé, Navit Naveh, Anne Boccuti, Raj Hanvesakul, Wenyan Li, Badri Rengarajan, Balázs Halmos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersJazz Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicineStandard of careOncologyLung cancerHealth careHealthcare systemInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e23266 Background: Lurbi monotherapy received approval in multiple countries, including accelerated US FDA approval and conditional Health Canada approval for adults with metastatic (US) or stage III/metastatic (Canada) SCLC with disease progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy, based on a phase 2, open-label, single-arm trial (Trigo et al, Lancet Oncol 2020). Jazz EMERGE 402 (NCT04894591) is a phase 4 observational study assessing the effectiveness, safety profile, and HCRU of lurbi in pts with extensive-stage SCLC treated in real-world clinical settings. Here, we report updated safety data and HCRU. Methods: This study is enrolling pts with extensive-stage SCLC treated with lurbi according to the local approved label in the US and Canada. Results: Enrollment is ongoing with a target of 300 pts. Between 28JUN2021 and 27DEC2022, 105 pts were enrolled and followed for ≥6 months after the first dose of lurbi (data cutoff: 27JUN2023). The median (range) age was 67 (44-87) years; 72 (69%) pts had prior immunotherapy; 22 (21%) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of ≥2; and 25 (24%) had central nervous system involvement. All pts received ≥1 cycle of lurbi; 56 (53%) as second-line (2L) and 37 (35%) as third-line (3L) therapy. The median (range) number of lurbi cycles was 4 (1-31) and the median (range) duration of exposure was 97 (21-694) days. Dose modifications occurred in 27 (26%) pts, with 17 (16%) requiring dose reductions. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was administered in 43 (41%) pts (34 [79%] as primary and 7 [16%] as secondary prophylaxis; 2 [5%] were unknown). At the time of data extraction, lurbi treatment was ongoing in 11 (10%) pts and 23 (22%) pts received subsequent anticancer therapy after lurbi. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 40 (38%) pts and treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs) in 13 (12%) pts. The most common TRAEs were anemia (n = 13, 12%), neutropenia (n = 10, 10%), nausea (n = 8, 8%), and fatigue (n = 7, 7%). Thirty-six pts were hospitalized for a median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of 10 (4, 18) days (Table). No pts were hospitalized on the first day of treatment; 4 pts were hospitalized during the first 21-day cycle. The most common reasons for hospitalization were pneumonia (n = 10, 28%) and sepsis (n = 6, 17%; one was an SAE). Conclusions: In this phase 4 study, lurbi was well tolerated, with low rates of HCRU and a safety profile generally consistent with that reported in the phase 2 trial. Clinical trial information: NCT04894591 . [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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207