Phase 3 AMPLITUDE trial: Niraparib (NIRA) and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AAP) for metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) patients (pts) with alterations in homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LBA5006 Background: NIRA is a highly selective and potent inhibitor of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-1/2. In the MAGNITUDE trial, NIRA + AAP significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in HRR gene–altered metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled AMPLITUDE trial (NCT04497844) evaluated the efficacy and safety of NIRA + AAP in HRR gene–altered mCSPC. Methods: Pts with germline or somatic HRR gene alterations ( BRCA1 , BRCA2 , BRIP1 , CDK12 , CHEK2 , FANCA , PALB2 , RAD51B , RAD54L ) were randomized 1:1 to a dual-action tablet (NIRA 200 mg + abiraterone acetate 1000 mg) plus prednisone 5 mg, or PBO + AAP (hereafter AAP). Eligible pts had received ≤6 mo of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) ± ≤6 cycles of docetaxel (DOC) ± ≤45 d of AAP with metastatic disease extended beyond lymph nodes. The primary end point is investigator-assessed rPFS (time from randomization to radiographic progression or death). Secondary end points include time to symptomatic progression (TSP), overall survival (OS), and safety. The Kaplan-Meier product limit method and a stratified Cox model were used for time-to-event variables and the hazard ratio (HR) and stratified log-rank test for estimating treatment effect. This is the first and final analysis for rPFS and the first interim analysis (of 3) for OS (data cutoff, 7 Jan 2025). Approximately 261 rPFS events were required (2-sided α, 0.025; power, 91%) for an HR ≤0.64 to demonstrate efficacy. Results: 696 pts were randomized to NIRA + AAP (n=348) or AAP (n=348). Median age was 68 y (IQR, 61-74); 55.6% had BRCA1/2 alterations, 78% were high-volume metastatic (M1), 87% were de novo M1, and 16% had prior DOC. Median follow-up is 30.8 mo. The primary end point was met, with rPFS significantly longer with NIRA + AAP (median, not reached [NR]) vs AAP (29.5 mo [95% CI, 25.8-NR]; HR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.49-0.80], p=0.0001), including in the prespecified BRCA1/2 subgroup (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.72], p<0.0001). TSP was significantly improved with NIRA + AAP vs AAP (HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.36-0.69], p<0.0001; BRCA1/2 : HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.29-0.68], p=0.0001). A trend in OS was seen at this first interim analysis (193/389 events) favoring NIRA + AAP (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.59-1.04], p=0.10; BRCA1/2 : HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.51-1.11], p=0.15). Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) occurred in 75.2% with NIRA + AAP and 58.9% with AAP, most commonly anemia (29.1% vs 4.6%) and hypertension (26.5% vs 18.4%). Treatment discontinuations due to AEs were low: NIRA + AAP: 11.0%; AAP: 6.9%. Conclusions: NIRA + AAP significantly improved rPFS and TSP vs AAP in pts receiving ADT +/- prior DOC and had a favorable effect on OS. There were no new safety signals. AMPLITUDE supports NIRA + AAP as a potential new standard of care for pts with HRR gene–altered mCSPC. Clinical trial information: NCT04497844 .
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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.
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".