ArticleAMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science
SAEgnal: A Predictive Assessment Framework for Optimizing Safety Profiles in Immuno-Oncology Combination Trials.
Article in AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Combination therapies are an emerging drug development strategy in cancer, particularly in the immunooncology (IO) space. Many combination studies do not meet their safety objectives due to serious adverse events (SAEs). Prediction of SAEs based on evidence from single and combination studies would be highly beneficial. To address the emerging challenge of optimizing the safety and efficacy of combination studies, we have assembled a novel oncology clinical trial data set with 329 trials, 685 arms (279 unique treatment arms), including 200 combinations, 79 mono arms, and 59 curated adverse event categories in the setting of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We integrated the database with an analytical framework: SAEgnal. Using SAEgnal, we have investigated the difference in the risk of 39 adverse event types between combination and monotherapy arms across a subset of 34 combination trials. We observed different risk profiles between combination and monotherapies; interestingly, while the risk of elevated AST/ALT is lower in combination arms (in 1/8 trials, p-value < 0.05), it is higher for bleeding (7/8 trials, p-value < 0.05). We envisage that the SAEgnal framework would enable rapid predictive analytics of SAEs in oncology and accelerate drug development in oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34457169PMC8378624What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.