Clinical experience and critical evaluation of the role of everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maxine Sun1, Firas Abdollah2, Jan Schmitges1, Claudio Jeldres1, Shahrokh F Shariat3, Paul Perrotte4, Pierre I Karakiewicz1,4 1Cancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, Canada; 2Department of Urology, Vita Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; 3Department of Urology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY, USA; 4Department of Urology, University of Montreal Health Center, Montreal, CanadaAbstract: The efficacy of sequential everolimus, an orally administered inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), was proven in a placebo-controlled phase III study, where median progression-free survival was 4.9 vs 1.9 months for placebo (hazard ratio: 0.33, P < 0.001). Placebo crossovers (80%) contaminated overall survival data. Adverse event discontinuation rate was of only 10% and health-adjusted quality-of-life was sustained. These data represent the first placebo-controlled evidence of efficacy for a seque ntially used targeted agent. Everolimus resulted in the strongest hazard ratio ever recorded for progression-free survival, despite it being tested in a population with the most aggressive natural history ever recorded in all available phase III metastatic renal cell carcinoma trials. Everolimus use after exclusively one prior antivascular endothelial growth factor f ailure resulted in an even longer progression-free survival time (5.4 months) than in the entire population (4.9 months). These benefits should also be considered in the light of sustained and unimpaired health-related quality of life. Use in first line other than second or subsequent lines remains to be validated.Keywords: everolimus, metastatic renal cell carcinoma, targeted therapy, sequential therapy, mTOR
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".