MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402741886 · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2024.09.003

Patient-reported Outcomes for Patients with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer and BRCA1/2 Gene Alterations: Final Analysis from the Randomized Phase 3 MAGNITUDE Trial

2024· article· en· W4402741886 on OpenAlexaff
Dana E. Rathkopf, Guilhem Roubaud, Kim N., Eleni Efstathiou, Gerhardt Attard, David Olmos, Eric J. Small, Marniza Saad, Elena Castro, Won Kim, Daphne Wu, Kristi Bertzos, Shiva Dibaj, Jenny Zhang, Peter Francis, Matthew R. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersJanssen Research and Development
KeywordsMedicineProstate cancerOncologyRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineCastrationProstateOrchiectomyGynecologyUrologyCancerHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There was no significant difference in time to deterioration of pain between niraparib in combination with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) and placebo plus AAP, and overall health-related quality of life was maintained in patients with BRCA1/2 -altered metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The patient-reported impact of side effects was minimal, and all side effects were clinically managed. The phase 3 MAGNITUDE trial assessed the efficacy and safety of niraparib 200 mg and abiraterone acetate 1000 mg plus prednisone 10 mg (AAP) in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and alterations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes. Here we report final analysis results for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the HRR + cohort with a focus on BRCA 1/2 alterations ( BRCA + ). Protocol-specified endpoints evaluated patient-reported symptoms, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and tolerability (side-effect bother) using the Brief Pain Inventory–Short Form (BPI-SF), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT-P), and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. Evaluations were completed on day 1 of designated treatment cycles and during follow-up. All patients with BRCA + mCRPC ( n = 225) were included in the PRO analyses with average on-treatment PRO compliance >80% when completed on-site. Time to deterioration in pain according to BPI-SF and FACT-P scores did not significantly differ between niraparib + AAP and placebo + AAP. During treatment, EQ-5D-5L revealed no clinically meaningful differences in overall HRQoL between treatment arms in the BRCA + subgroup. Finally, tolerability was similar between arms; side effect bother rated as “not at all” or “a little bit” ranged from 79.8% to 95.9% during treatment. Limitations include a sample size that may not have been powered to detect a difference in PROs. Treatment with niraparib + AAP maintained HRQoL with minimal side-effect bother reported by most patients with BRCA + mCRPC. Differences between treatment groups in time to pain deterioration did not meet conventional levels of statistical significance. The MAGNITUDE trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03748641.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean UrologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207