MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417148749 · doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2025.11.020

Durvalumab with carboplatin/paclitaxel and bevacizumab followed by durvalumab and bevacizumab with or without olaparib maintenance in newly diagnosed non-BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer

2025· article· en· W4417148749 on OpenAlexaff
Philipp Harter, Fabian Trillsch, Aikou Okamoto, Ji‐Hoon Kim, María Jesús Rubio-Pérez, Mehmet Ali Vardar, G Scambia, Olivier Trédan, Gitte-Bettina Nyvang, N. Colombo, Mariusz Bidziński, Christoph Grimm, S. Lheureux, Els Van Nieuwenhuysen, Florian Heitz, Robert M. Wenham, Shin Nishio, Myong Cheol Lim, Gloria Marquina, Özden Altundağ, Alice Bergamini, Renaud Sabatier, P. Wimberger, Michael A. Gold, J. Sehouli, Tjoung‐Won Park‐Simon, Erin E. Kent, A. Correa, C. Aghajanian

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPARP inhibition in cancer therapy
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsBevacizumabDurvalumabOlaparibOvarian cancerProstate cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment advances in newly diagnosed advanced-stage ovarian cancer (aOC), improved outcomes are needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DUO-O (NCT03737643), a phase III placebo-controlled trial, enrolled patients with newly diagnosed aOC. Following one cycle of carboplatin/paclitaxel ± bevacizumab, patients without a tumor BRCA mutation (non-tBRCAm) were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1) at cycle 2 to carboplatin/paclitaxel plus bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab (control); carboplatin/paclitaxel, bevacizumab plus durvalumab followed by bevacizumab plus durvalumab (durvalumab arm); or carboplatin/paclitaxel, bevacizumab plus durvalumab followed by bevacizumab, durvalumab plus olaparib (durvalumab + olaparib arm). Investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; primary endpoint) was tested for the durvalumab + olaparib arm versus control in the non-tBRCAm homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive and non-tBRCAm intention-to-treat (ITT) populations. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred and thirty patients were randomly allocated to the study. The prespecified interim PFS analysis [data cut-off (DCO): 5 December 2022] qualified as the primary analysis; PFS hazard ratio (HR) for the durvalumab + olaparib arm versus control was 0.49 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.69, P < 0.0001; median (m) PFS 37.3 versus 23.0 months] in the non-tBRCAm HRD-positive and 0.63 (95% CI 0.52-0.76, P < 0.0001; mPFS 24.2 versus 19.3 months) in the non-tBRCAm ITT population. For the durvalumab arm versus control, PFS HR was 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-1.04, P = 0.13; mPFS 20.6 versus 19.3 months) in the non-tBRCAm ITT population. At final PFS and interim overall survival (OS) analysis (DCO: 18 September 2023), PFS results were consistent with primary analysis; interim OS HR for the durvalumab + olaparib arm versus control was 0.95 (95% CI 0.76-1.20, P = 0.68; 39.0% maturity) in the non-tBRCAm ITT population. Safety was generally consistent with the profiles of the individual agents. CONCLUSIONS: DUO-O met its primary PFS endpoints for first-line durvalumab plus carboplatin/paclitaxel and bevacizumab followed by durvalumab, bevacizumab plus olaparib maintenance versus carboplatin/paclitaxel and bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab in the non-tBRCAm HRD-positive and non-tBRCAm ITT populations. Further insight into long-term benefit is anticipated with additional follow-up.

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)0.000
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicPARP inhibition in cancer therapyFrench-language works237,207