MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415295904 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2510308

Survival with Osimertinib plus Chemotherapy in <i>EGFR</i> -Mutated Advanced NSCLC

2025· article· en· W4415295904 on OpenAlexaff
Pasi A. Jänne, David Planchard, Kunihiko Kobayashi, James Chih‐Hsin Yang, Ying L. Liu, Natalia Valdiviezo, Tae Min Kim, Liyan Jiang, Hiroshi Kagamu, Noriko Yanagitani, Jialei Wang, Bivas Biswas, Artem Poltoratskiy, Yeni Nerón, Carlos A. Rojas, Leona Koubková, Carles Escriu, Doreen A. Ezeife, Helen Mann, Elena Armenteros-Monterroso, Yuri Rukazenkov, Chee Khoon Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsOsimertinibChemotherapyAdverse effectOverall survivalSurvival analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundThe primary analysis of this trial showed that first-line treatment with osimertinib plus chemotherapy with a platinum-based agent and pemetrexed led to significantly longer progression-free survival than osimertinib monotherapy among patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–mutated advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results from the planned final analysis of overall survival are needed. MethodsIn this phase 3, international, open-label trial, we randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio patients with EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation) advanced NSCLC who had not previously received treatment for advanced disease to receive either osimertinib (80 mg once daily) plus chemotherapy with pemetrexed (500 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and a platinum-based agent (cisplatin [75 mg per square meter] or carboplatin [pharmacologically guided dose]) or osimertinib monotherapy (80 mg once daily). The key secondary end point was overall survival. Research Summary Osimertinib plus Chemotherapy in EGFR-Mutated NSCLC ResultsA total of 557 patients were randomly assigned to the osimertinib plus platinum–pemetrexed group (279 patients) or the osimertinib monotherapy group (278 patients). The median overall survival was 47.5 months in the osimertinib plus platinum–pemetrexed group and 37.6 months in the osimertinib monotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.61 to 0.96; P=0.02). Grade 3 or higher adverse events of any cause were reported in 70% of the patients in the osimertinib plus platinum–pemetrexed group and in 34% of the patients in the osimertinib monotherapy group; adverse events leading to the discontinuation of osimertinib were reported in 12% and 7%, respectively. ConclusionsAmong patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, first-line treatment with osimertinib plus platinum–pemetrexed led to significantly longer overall survival than osimertinib monotherapy and was associated with an increased risk of reversible adverse events of grade 3 or higher. (Funded by AstraZeneca; FLAURA2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04035486.) Quick Take Osimertinib plus Chemotherapy in EGFR-Mutated NSCLC 2m 4s Dr. Glaucomflecken Explains Dr. Glaucomflecken Explains: Osimertinib plus Chemotherapy in EGFR-Mutated NSCLC 1m 31s

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations58
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207