MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408956488 · doi:10.1093/oncolo/oyaf037

Ramucirumab and paclitaxel in second or greater lines of therapy in patients with HER2-positive gastroesophageal cancer: a single center study

2025· article· en· W4408956488 on OpenAlexaff
Yvonne Bach, Divya Sharma, Hiroko Aoyama, X. Lucy, Carly C. Barron, Xin Wang, Sohail Akhtar, Yahan Yang, Asselain Bernard, Ronan Andrew McLaughlin, Thais Baccili Cury Megid, Abdul Rehman Farooq, Eric X. Chen, Raymond Jang, Elena Elimova

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Oncologist · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRamucirumabMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioCancerPaclitaxelOncologyProgression-free survivalChemotherapyConfidence intervalGastroenterologyTrastuzumabBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression is present in approximately 20-25 of patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). Upon progression on 1st line therapy, ramucirumab and paclitaxel (rampac) is given in ≥2 line setting regardless of HER2 status. We aim to assess whether ramucirumab is associated with better survival in HER2 positive(+) pts compared to those with HER2(-) disease. METHODS: We reviewed all consecutive adult patients with metastatic/unresectable GEA who were treated with rampac for ≥2nd line therapy at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre from 2010 to 2021. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were defined as time from starting rampac to progression or death and estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: There were 126 patients who received rampac following progression of 1st line chemotherapy, 96(76%) were male. The age at time of presentation and starting rampac was 59.0 ± 10.3 years and 59.9 ± 10.3 years, respectively. At the time of diagnosis, 32(25%) patients were HER2+. The majority of patients (n = 99;78%) received rampac in the 2L line setting compared to 28(22%) patients who received it in the 3rd/4th line setting. The median PFS and OS for HER2 + pts were 3.6 months and 9.4 months, respectively, which were similar to HER2- patients (median PFS = 3.6 months; median OS = 8.2 months). There was no statistically significant association between HER2 positivity and PFS (adjusted hazards ratio (HR) = 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-1.22, P = .26), nor OS (adjusted HR = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.55-1.41, P = .59). CONCLUSION: Rampac remains a valid treatment option for patients who are unable to participate in trials or do not have access to further HER2-directed therapy beyond first line.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe OncologistSame topicGastric Cancer Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207