189P Early international uptake of an AI-powered oncology clinical trial knowledge platform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common intraocular malignancy in adults.Despite effective local treatment, up to half of patients develop hepatic metastases, which are associated with poor prognosis.The CHOPIN trial (NCT04283890) was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of melphalan percutaneous hepatic perfusion (M-PHP) combined with ipilimumab/nivolumab (M-PHP+I/N) versus M-PHP alone.A subgroup of participants used a mHealth platform to monitor quality of life (QoL) and time to physical recovery, aiming to assess feasibility, evaluate QoL and mobility among cohorts, and explore associations between digital and clinical outcomes.Methods: The mHealth platform included a patient-reported outcome app for QoL (EORTC-QLQ C30), a smartwatch and a smart scale.The watch measured heart rate, steps, and sleep data; the scale measured weight.Device monitoring lasted 6 months; follow-up ended 1 year post-inclusion with the final questionnaire.Clinical outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), were also collected.QoL was analyzed using mixed linear model regression.Results: A total of 19 patients participated in the remote monitoring program (12 men, 7 women; mean age 63, range 39-75).Eleven participants received M-PHP only and 8 received M-PHP+I/N.Ten patients completed the mHealth part of the study, 1 died, 3 stopped due to disease progression, 1 withdrew and 4 are still ongoing.All participants experienced at least one AE, 70% being grade 1 or 2. Patients receiving M-PHP+I/N experienced significantly more grade 2-4 AEs compared to M-PHP only (p=0.005).Mean Global Health/QoL scores were 75/100 for the M-PHP only arm and 65/100 for the M-PHP+I/N arm.Neither arm showed a significant change in QoL over time (p=0.96).Analyses of wearable data are ongoing and will be presented at the meeting.Conclusions: mHealth-based remote monitoring was feasible for patients with metastatic UM undergoing study treatment.Although QoL in the M-PHP+N/I group was lower since baseline, there was no evidence of a significant change over time between the treatment arms. Clinical trial identification: NCT04283890.
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 | 0.074 | 0.169 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.360 | 0.142 |
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".