MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Secondary cytoreduction followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer (SOC-1): A final overall survival analysis of a multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial.

2024· article· en· W4399395081 on OpenAlexaff
Rongyu Zang, Jianqing Zhu, Jihong Liu, Rong Jiang, Xi Cheng, Yulian Chen, Huixun Jia, Tingyan Shi, Yi Guo, Yanling Feng, Dongsheng Tu, Yuqin Zhang, Xiao Huang, Shiyang Jiang, Wen Gao, Huijuan Yang, Zhang Ping

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChemotherapyOvarian cancerOncologyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialOverall survivalSurgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

5520 Background: Surgery for platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer is widely practiced but has contradictory outcomes of survival in previously published studies. Methods: This multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 trial was performed in four primarily academic centers in China. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years old with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer and were predicted to have resectable disease according to the international model (iMODEL) combined with PET-CT, which was reported previously. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were the co-primary end points in hierarchical testing and planned for the final analysis of OS with a two-sided alpha of 0.05, when 209 deaths happened. Results: Between July 19, 2012 and June 3, 2019, 357 patients were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery (182 pts.) or control (175 pts.). Median follow-up was 82.5 m. The median OS was 58.1 m in the surgery group and 52.1 m in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 1.05; P=0.109). Overall, 61/175 (35%) patients in the control group crossed to surgery in subsequent therapies. A sensitive analysis showed that adjusted HR for death for crossover to surgery was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.99) (Table). When excluding the center with the highest crossover rate, secondary cytoreduction provided a 21.0-m benefit of overall survival over a control therapy. The highest crossover surgery rate was 49% in patients with 4-19 sites of relapse. The hazard ratio for death in patients with 1-19 sites was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.46 to 1.03). Patients with a complete resection had the most favorable outcome, with a median OS of 73 m. Median time to second subsequent therapy was 34.8 m vs 28.1 m (HR 0.68; 0.55-0.87). 24 of 182 (13.2%) patients remained relapse free and alive over 60 m in the surgery group, as compared with 5 of 175 (0.6%) patients in the control group. Conclusions: Secondary cytoreduction did not increase overall survival in the intention-to-treat population but led to a longer duration of overall survival when the crossover effect was taken into consideration. These findings are arguably clinically meaningful and support the efficacy of secondary cytoreduction in specialized centers and selected patients. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01611766. Res Sponsor: Shanghai Gynecologic Oncology Group. Clinical trial information: NCT01611766 . [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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment→French-language works237,207→