MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Trial in progress (XALute): Phase 3 study of xaluritamig vs investigator’s choice of cabazitaxel or second androgen receptor directed therapy (ARDT) in post-taxane metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2025· article· en· W4410809399 on OpenAlexaff
William Kevin Kelly, Michael J. Morris, Lisa Kristina Horvath, Viktor Grünwald, Alton Oliver Sartor, Johann S. de Bono, Karim Fizazi, Kim N., Joaquı́n Mateo, Joshua Kapp, Zhao Yang, Nobuaki Matsubara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAmgen
KeywordsCabazitaxelMedicineTaxaneProstate cancerAndrogen receptorOncologyAndrogen deprivation therapyInternal medicineAndrogenCancerProstateGynecologyBreast cancerHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS5118 Background: The median overall survival of patients with mCRPC remains under 2 years even with newer therapies. Xaluritamig, an XmAb 2+1 T-cell engager that targets the six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of prostate 1 (STEAP1), facilitates lysis of STEAP1-expressing cancer cells, such as those in advanced prostate cancer. In a first-in-human study, xaluritamig demonstrated encouraging efficacy and a manageable safety profile for patients with mCRPC refractory to standard of care therapies (Kelly WK, et al. Cancer Discov. 2024;14(1):76-89). Methods: XALute is a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of xaluritamig vs cabazitaxel or second ARDT in men with mCRPC previously treated with taxane chemotherapy. Enrollment in the control arm treatments will be split evenly between cabazitaxel and second ARDT. Stratification factors include LDH ≤ or > 260 IU/L, liver metastases (Y/N), prior prostate-specific membrane antigen radioligand therapy (PSMA-RLT) (Y/N) and the intention to treat with cabazitaxel or ARDT switch. Approximately 675 patients will be enrolled. Participants will be randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to xaluritamig monotherapy or standard care. Participants will receive treatment until radiographic disease progression per Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Working Group 3 (PCWG3), unacceptable toxicity, initiation of other anticancer therapy, withdrawal of consent, death, or end of study as determined by the sponsor. The primary efficacy endpoint is overall survival. The key secondary efficacy endpoint is radiographic progression-free survival per PCWG3 by blinded independent central review. Key inclusion criteria are pathological/cytological confirmation of prostate adenocarcinoma; mCRPC with at least one metastatic lesion; evidence of progressive disease; prior treatment with at least one ARDT; one taxane therapy in the mCRPC setting, and ongoing androgen deprivation with serum testosterone levels (<50 ng/dL or <1.7 nmol/L). Prior treatment with PSMA-RLT, poly ADP-ribosylation inhibitors, and immune checkpoint inhibitors are permitted. Exclusion criteria include prior STEAP1-targeted therapy, any anticancer therapy within 4 weeks prior to first dose of study treatment (not including androgen deprivation therapy), prior PSMA-RLT within 2 months of first dose of study treatment unless less than 2 cycles received, and prior radionuclide therapy (radium-223) within 2 months of first dose of study treatment To mitigate risk of cytokine release syndrome, xaluritamig will be administered with step dosing. Cabazitaxel or second ARDT will be administered according to regional prescribing information. Funded by Amgen Inc. Clinical trial information: NCT06691984 .

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)0.003
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research→French-language works237,207→