Phase II propensity-matched controlled trial evaluating metformin as an adjunct to neo-adjuvant, concomitant, and adjuvant temozolomide and hypofractionated-accelerated radiotherapy (M-HART) in glioblastoma patients (NCT02780024).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2064 Background: Phase II, propensity-matched trial, to assess feasibility and toxicity of adding Metformin (MTF) to neo-adjuvant, concomitant and adjuvant Temozolomide (TMZ) and hypofractionated accelerated radiotherapy (M-HART), for patients with Glioblastoma (GBM). We compared median survival time (MST), and progression-free-survival (PFS) of M-HART versus a contemporaneous cohort of propensity-score matched controls (PSMC) who received standard of care (SOC). Methods: Eligible patients were ≥ 18 years with newly diagnosed GBM, ECOG score ≤ 2, with known MGMT status, gross total or partial resection, and residual surgical cavity > 15 mm from brainstem, or optic apparatus. Four weeks from surgery, M-HART patients started 2 weeks of neo-adjuvant MTF/TMZ followed by concomitant MTF/TMZ + HART 60 Gy/20 daily fractions, and 6 cycles of adjuvant MTF/TMZ. The PSMC patients received Stupp’s regimen. We used a nearest neighbor matching with a caliper width of 0.2 SD and compared patients’ characteristics using chi-square test (Table). Propensity scores were estimated using logistic regression model, with probability of M-HART treatment as dependent variable. Results: From April 2015 to November 2020, 50 patients participated in the M-HART trial and matched with 50 PSMC cohort treated during the same period, with a median follow up of 24.1 (M-HART) vs 17.6 months PSMC, respectively. M-HART patients had significantly longer MST of 24.1 (95% CI, 15.2- 30.3) vs. 17.7 months for PSMC patients (95% CI, 12-20) (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.40-0.93]; P = 0.02), and significantly longer PFS of 13.7 (95% CI, 11.7 to 18.8) vs. 11.0 months (95% CI, 9-12) (HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.42-0.95]; P = 0.02). M-HART treatment was an independent predictor of survival. M-HART patients with methylated-MGMT and gross total resection had significant longer MST of 41.9 vs. 17.8 months for PSMC (95% CI, 15.1-20.5 months) (HR 0.21 [95% CI, 0.09-0.49]; P = 0.001). Conclusions: M-HART protocol is novel, feasible, and well-tolerated approach with significantly longer MST and PFS as compared to propensity-matched SOC controls. These results add to growing evidence for the use of Metformin as an adjunct to HART and TMZ especially in M-MGMT GBM. Clinical trial information: NCT02780024 . Characteristics of M-HART versus propensity-matched standard of care control patients. M-HART N=50 (%) CONTROLS N=50 (%) P-value Age (years)≤ 60> 60 34 (68)16 (32) 27 (54)23 (46) 0.218 SexMaleFemale 22 (44)28 (56) 30 (60)20 (40) 0.161 ECOG-score0-12 43 (84)7 (14) 47 (94)3 (6) 0.318 Surgery Gross Total Subtotal 41 (82)9 (18) 39 (78)11 (22) 0.803 MGMT statusUnmethylatedMethylated 34 (68)16 (32) 29 (58)21 (42) 0.015 Re-operationYesNo 24 (84)26 (52) 18 (36)32 (64) 0.077 Chemotherapy at recurrenceYesNo 14 (28)36 (74) 27 (54)23 (46) <0.001
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".