MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Safety and time to response of [<sup>177</sup>Lu]Lu-DOTATATE in patients with newly diagnosed advanced grade 2 and grade 3, well-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Sub-analysis of the phase 3 randomized NETTER-2 study.

2024· article· en· W4399736336 on OpenAlexaff
Pamela L. Kunz, Diego Ferone, Daniel M. Halperin, Sten Myrehaug, Ken Herrmann, Marianne Pavel, Beth Chasen, Jaume Capdevila, Salvatore Tafuto, Do‐Youn Oh, Changhoon Yoo, Stephen Falk, Þorvarður R. Hálfdánarson, Ilya Folitar, Yufen Zhang, Wouter W. de Herder, Simron Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuroendocrine tumorsInternal medicineNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4131 Background: NETTER-2 (NCT03972488) is the first randomized study to evaluate radioligand therapy ([177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE; hereafter 177Lu-DOTATATE) at first line (1L) in patients (pts) with advanced, well-differentiated higher grade (G2 and G3) gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs). Significant improvements in progression-free survival and objective response rate (ORR) were observed for pts receiving 177Lu-DOTATATE. This sub-analysis of NETTER-2 assessed safety and time to response (TTR). Methods: Eligible pts (n=226) were newly diagnosed with somatostatin receptor-positive high G2 or G3 (Ki67 ≥10% and ≤55%) advanced GEP-NETs and were randomized (2:1) to receive 4 cycles of 177Lu-DOTATATE (4 × 7.4 GBq every 8 weeks [Q8W]) plus 30 mg octreotide long-acting repeatable (LAR) Q8W during 177Lu-DOTATATE treatment then Q4W (177Lu-DOTATATE arm), or 60 mg octreotide LAR Q4W (control arm). Hematologic adverse events (AEs) and laboratory toxicities were scored according to CTCAE grade. Response was assessed centrally based on conventional imaging (RECIST 1.1 criteria). Results: The AE pattern in the 177Lu-DOTATATE arm was consistent with the established safety profile. Among laboratory abnormalities, grade 3/4 decreases in lymphocytes (38.1% vs 2.7%), leukocytes (4.1% vs 0), neutrophils (3.4% vs 0), platelets (2.0% vs 0) and hemoglobin (1.4% vs 2.7%) were observed in 177Lu-DOTATATE (n=147) and control (n=73) arms, respectively; median time to first occurrence of hematologic toxicities was 4.4 months among pts with immediate hematotoxicities. These events were transient and manageable. There was no notable difference in infection rates between treatment arms (31.3% 177Lu-DOTATATE and 27.4% control). One case of myelodysplastic syndrome was observed (177Lu-DOTATATE arm ~14 months after first cycle). Five fatal AEs occurred during the randomized treatment period; all considered unrelated to treatment and attributed to GEP-NET progression. AEs leading to 177Lu-DOTATATE dose interruption, reduction and discontinuation occurred in 14 (9.5%), 2 (1.4%) and 3 (2.0%) pts, respectively. Among 65 responders in the 177Lu-DOTATATE arm (ORR 43 %), median TTR (Q1, Q3) was 5.7 months (4.1, 8.3). Most responses occurred during the 4-cycle treatment with 177Lu-DOTATATE. Conclusions: In pts with advanced G2 and G3 (Ki67 ≥10% and ≤55%) GEP-NETs treated with 177Lu-DOTATATE at 1L the most common hematologic toxicity was lymphopenia, but infection rates were similar vs control. With a median TTR of 5.7 months, most responses to 177Lu-DOTATATE occurred during scheduled treatment. Overall, the study confirmed the safety profile of 177Lu-DOTATATE and supports its use at 1L for this pt population. Clinical trial information: NCT03972488 .

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 designNon-randomized 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 OncologySame topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research AdvancesFrench-language works237,207