MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417357775 · doi:10.1093/noajnl/vdaf236.035

10204-CS-21 Exploratory analyses from the INDIGO study on the mechanism of seizure control by vorasidenib through tumor volume reduction

2025· article· en· W4417357775 on OpenAlexaff
Touat Mehdi, Wick Wolfgang, Ingo K. Mellinghoff, Martin J. van den Bent, Deborah T. Blumenthal, Katherine B. Peters, Jennifer Clarke, Mendez Joe, Warren Mason, Andreas F. Hottinger, Juan Manuel Sepúlveda-Sánchez, Soffietti Riccardo, Dan Zhao, Yi Denise, Steelman Lori, H. M. Touhidul Islam, Patrick Y. Wen, Timothy F. Cloughesy

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlaceboConfidence intervalExploratory analysisGliomaBrain tumorEpilepsyPhases of clinical research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with grade 2 IDH1/2 mutant (mIDH1/2) gliomas may experience symptoms (e. g. seizures) that impact their daily lives. Vorasidenib, an oral, brain-penetrant, dual inhibitor of mIDH1/2, has shown significant clinical benefits, including gradual tumor shrinkage, and a manageable safety profile in the Phase 3 INDIGO study. Herein, we investigate the potential relationship between vorasidenib and seizure rate, and between tumor volume and seizure activity in patients with mIDH1/2 glioma. Methods Patients aged >12 years with grade 2 mIDH1/2 oligodendroglioma or astrocytoma, no prior treatment for glioma other than surgery, and no uncontrolled seizures were randomized 1:1 to receive vorasidenib 40 mg or placebo daily. Exploratory analyses for the number of on-treatment seizures were conducted in patients with more than 1 seizure in the baseline or on-treatment periods using a negative binomial regression model. The potential association between seizure activity and tumor volume was assessed using the mixed-effect model with repeated measurements. P-values were not prespecified. Results This analysis included 168 patients treated with vorasidenib (oligodendroglioma: n = 88; astrocytoma: n = 80) and 163 patients treated with placebo (oligodendroglioma: n = 84; astrocytoma: n = 79). Patients treated with vorasidenib had lower on-treatment rates of seizures than those treated with placebo (model-estimated rate of on-treatment seizures per person-year: 18.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.4, 39.5] vs 51.2 [95% CI 22.9, 114.8]; ratio of rates: 0. 36 [95% CI 0.14, 0. 89]; P = 0.0263). There was a highly positive correlation between tumor volume and seizure number (log tumor size estimate of coefficient: 0.7; standard error: 0.26; P = 0.007). Conclusion Treatment with vorasidenib was associated with lower seizure activity than with placebo in patients with mIDH1/2 glioma. Smaller tumor volume was associated with a lower seizure rate. Since treatment with vorasidenib also leads to gradual tumor shrinkage, these results suggest a potential mechanism of seizure control by tumor size reduction with vorasidenib.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.346
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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology AdvancesSame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207