Survival with Osimertinib plus Chemotherapy in <i>EGFR</i> -Mutated Advanced NSCLC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: )-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Results from the planned final analysis of overall survival are needed. METHODS: -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. RESULTS: A 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. CONCLUSIONS: -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.).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".