MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409129984 · doi:10.1200/jco-25-00275

Taletrectinib in <i>ROS1</i> + Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: TRUST

2025· article· en· W4409129984 on OpenAlexaff
M. Pérol, Wei Li, Nathan A. Pennell, Geoffrey Liu, Yuichiro Ohe, Filippo de Braud, Misako Nagasaka, Enriqueta Felip, Anwen Xiong, Yongchang Zhang, Huijie Fan, Xicheng Wang, Shuanglian Li, Rose Lai, Fei-Wu Ran, Xianyu Zhang, Wenfeng Chen, Lyudmila Bazhenova, Caicun Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineDysgeusiaAdverse effectClinical endpointPopulationClinical trialLung cancerROS1GastroenterologyPhases of clinical researchSurgeryCancerAdenocarcinoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: + non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: TRUST-I and TRUST-II were phase II, single-arm, open-label, nonrandomized, multicenter trials. Efficacy outcomes were pooled from TRUST-I and TRUST-II pivotal cohorts. The safety population comprised all patients treated with once-daily oral taletrectinib 600 mg pooled across the taletrectinib clinical program. The primary end point was independent review committee-assessed confirmed objective response rate (cORR). Secondary outcomes included intracranial (IC)-ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), and safety. RESULTS: As of June 7, 2024, the efficacy-evaluable population included 273 patients in TRUST-I and TRUST-II. Among TKI-naïve patients (n = 160), the cORR was 88.8% and the IC-cORR was 76.5%; in TKI-pretreated patients (n = 113), the cORR was 55.8% and the IC-cORR was 65.6%. In TKI-naïve patients, the median DOR and median PFS were 44.2 and 45.6 months, respectively. In TKI-pretreated patients, the median DOR and median PFS were 16.6 and 9.7 months. The cORR in patients with G2032R mutation was 61.5% (8 of 13). Among 352 patients treated with taletrectinib 600 mg once daily, the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were GI events (88%) and elevated AST (72%) and ALT (68%); most were grade 1. Neurologic TEAEs were infrequent (dizziness, 21%; dysgeusia, 15%) and mostly grade 1. TEAEs leading to discontinuations (6.5%) were low. CONCLUSION: Taletrectinib showed a high response rate with durable responses, robust IC activity, prolonged PFS, favorable safety, and low rates of neurologic adverse events in TKI-naïve and pretreated patients.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.451 · 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

Citations46
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207