MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410950112 · doi:10.1080/14796694.2025.2502318

rechARge: a randomized phase III trial of the androgen receptor ligand-directed degrader, BMS-986365, vs investigator’s choice in patients with mCRPC

2025· article· en· W4410950112 on OpenAlexaff
Kim Nguyen, Rana R. McKay, Shahneen Sandhu, José Ángel Arranz, Philippe Barthélémy, Boris Hadaschik, Nobuaki Matsubara, Neal D. Shore, Dingwei Ye, Teresa Cascella, Irina Irincheeva, Stephanie Kreiser, Antoine Thiery-Vuillemin, Dana E. Rathkopf

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer InstituteBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsEnzalutamideMedicineCabazitaxelProstate cancerAndrogen receptorAbiraterone acetateOncologyInternal medicineDocetaxelRandomized controlled trialClinical endpointClinical trialAndrogen deprivation therapyPharmacologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an ongoing need for efficacious, life-prolonging therapies for males with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). mCRPC that progresses after treatment with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) may still be driven by AR signaling. BMS-986365 is a heterobifunctional, orally bioavailable ligand-directed degrader that targets the AR through a first-in-class dual mechanism of AR degradation and antagonism. Here, we present the study design of rechARge, a phase III, randomized, multicenter, adaptive, two-part, open-label trial evaluating BMS-986365 versus investigator’s choice of therapy comprising either docetaxel or a switch to an alternative ARPI (abiraterone or enzalutamide) in patients with mCRPC whose disease has progressed after treatment with one prior ARPI. The primary study objective is to compare the efficacy and safety of BMS-986365 versus investigator’s choice of therapy. Approximately 960 patients will be enrolled.Clinical trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier is NCT06764485.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture OncologySame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207