MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A phase 2 study of BOLD-100 in combination with FOLFOX chemotherapy in patients with pretreated advanced biliary tract cancer: Efficacy and safety analysis (BOLD-100-001).

2024· article· en· W4399881498 on OpenAlexaff
Grainne M. O’Kane, Do‐Youn Oh, Jennifer L. Spratlin, Sun Young Rha, Elena Elimova, Petr Kavan, Rachel Goodwin, Yongjun Cha, Seung Tae Kim, E. Russell McAllister, Michelle Jones, Malcolm Snow, Yasmin Lemmerick, Gonzalo Spera, Jim Pankovich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsTranslational Research in OncologyJewish General HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOttawa HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBiliary tract cancerFOLFOXChemotherapyBiliary tractCancerInternal medicineOncologyPhases of clinical researchGemcitabineGastroenterologyColorectal cancerOxaliplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4115 Background: BOLD-100 is a first-in-class ruthenium-based anticancer agent in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of advanced gastrointestinal (GI) cancers in combination with FOLFOX. BOLD-100 demonstrated synergy in established preclinical models in combination with various anticancer therapies. Methods: In this prospective Phase 2 study, patients with pretreated advanced biliary tract cancers (BTC) received BOLD-100 (625 mg/m2) in combination with FOLFOX on day 1 of each 14-day cycle until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of BOLD-100 in three clinical endpoints (PFS, OS, and ORR). Disease Control Rate (DCR) was also determined. Bayesian modelling was used to continually reassess these endpoints, the posterior probability of superiority to an historical landmark for each endpoint. Results: As of 31 Dec 2023, 22 pts with advanced metastatic BTC (5 gall bladder, 5 intrahepatic, 8 distal, 1 perihilar, and 3 unk) were enrolled and treated in the study. At enrollment, pts had a median age of 61 years [range 33, 81] and had a median of 10.9 months from diagnosis of metastatic disease. All patients were ECOG ≤ 1. Patients had a median of 2 prior systemic therapies [range 1, 5] with 13 receiving 2 or more prior regimens. 21/22 BTC patients received prior GEM/CIS, 8 pts had prior 5-FU treatment and 6 prior IO. On study, pts received a median of 4 cycles BOLD-100 + FOLFOX [range 1, 41]. Median PFS was 6.0 [95% credible interval (CI) 3.8, 10] months, median OS 7.3 [CI 4.5, 13] months, ORR 6% [1,23] and DCR 83% [62, 95] in the 18 evaluable patients. Six patients had reductions in their target lesions with 1 partial response. Study treatment was well tolerated. For the 22 treated patients, 21 reported 1 or more treatment-related adverse events (AEs), most commonly neutrophil count decreased (n=10, 46%), nausea (n=8, 36%), fatigue (n=7, 32%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (n=6, 27%), and pyrexia (n=6, 27%). Nine patients (41%) reported G3/4 neutrophil count decreased. Conclusions: BOLD-100 combined with FOLFOX is an active and well-tolerated treatment regimen in Stage IV BTC. There were no new safety signals detected. The mPFS, mOS, ORR and DCR data in this advanced BTC cancer population indicate a treatment combination worthy of further study for this difficult to treat cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT04421820 .

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)0.001
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207