OMAHA-004: what clinicians are saying
opevesostat in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer post one NHA · NCT06136650 ↗ · Phase 3 · Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC
In one discussion, a speaker hopes OMAHA-004 could become standard care for AR-LBD-mutated disease because of earlier subgroup activity, not demonstrated trial benefit. In separate discussion, a speaker describes earlier activity without AR mutations, leaving mutation status unproven as a selection rule for opevesostat. A medical oncologist described in the sources as involved in the trial stresses that broad steroid suppression requires hormone replacement. The sources reviewed for this edition provide no comparative benefit or safety outcomes.
Created with AI · how we check it
- edition 1
- commentary checked Nov 14, 2026
- 61 verified statements
5 findings, and what sits behind each
01. One video calls OMAHA-004 mutation-specific; another presentation describes testing both mutation groups
No named clinician · accounts and unnamed speakers · 11 statements in 3 sources, 2 of them podcasts or videos · 12 passages
Limitations recorded: 3.
Draws on: Population and setting, Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS), Secondary endpoints, Design and conduct.
02. Two named contributors stress steroid replacement; one video asks about major side effects
1 of 2 cited clinicians · 9 statements from 2 speakers in 5 sources, 3 of them podcasts or videos · 8 passages
Limitations recorded: 3.
Draws on: Safety and tolerability.
03. Two named contributors see upstream steroid blockade as a strategy for hormonal resistance
2 of 2 cited clinicians · 19 statements from 3 speakers in 7 sources, 3 of them podcasts or videos · 13 passages
Limitations recorded: 3.
04. One X account frames OMAHA-004 as earlier testing against ARPI switching
2 of 2 cited clinicians · 17 statements from 2 speakers in 7 sources, 2 of them podcasts or videos · 11 passages
Limitations recorded: 4.
Draws on: Design and conduct, The comparison, Population and setting, Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS), Secondary endpoints.
05. One LinkedIn account presents recruitment as access and anticipates another treatment option
No named clinician · accounts and unnamed speakers · 8 statements from 1 speaker in 2 sources · 4 passages
Limitations recorded: 3.
Draws on: Population and setting, Design and conduct.
Counts overlap, since one statement can back several findings. They show what the report kept, not how many clinicians agree. The full report includes the interpretations and source links.
Select a finding to see what the full report holds for it. Select a part of the trial to see which findings draw on it.
- Finding 1 of 5
No named clinician · accounts and unnamed speakers
One video calls OMAHA-004 mutation-specific; another presentation describes testing both mutation groups
11 statements in 3 sources, 2 of them podcasts or videos
- 11
- statements
- 12
- passages
- 3
- sources
- 0
- speakers
What the statements areViews 8Questions and uncertainty 1Clinical experience 0Comparisons 0Restated results and context 2Statement-to-passage links (a passage can back several statements)Supporting a statement 12Giving context 4Recorded with the findingLimitations: 3
2 podcasts and video · 1 publication
Draws on: Population and setting, Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS), Secondary endpoints, Design and conduct.
Thicker lines mean more shared statements. A finding without a line goes beyond the registered design. Counts overlap: one statement can back several findings.
The full report also has 1 finding about other patients, lines of treatment or settings, after these trial findings under “Beyond the trial population”. They are not counted or listed on this page.
Abbreviations (5)
ARPI, androgen receptor pathway inhibitor; HCP, healthcare professional; MCP, Model Context Protocol, how AI agents read the report; NPI, National Provider Identifier, the US registry number for clinicians; OS, overall survival.
The full OMAHA-004 report gives each finding its interpretation, the attributed views behind it, counterviews, limits and the verified statements, each linked to the original. One report in the catalog, IDeate-Lung01, is free in full, so you can see what a paid report holds before you buy: read the free IDeate-Lung01 report.
What do clinicians say OMAHA-004 needs to show on radiographic progression-free and overall survival before considering opevesostat instead of ARPI switching in AR-LBD mutation-negative as well as mutation-positive mCRPC after one ARPI without prior mCRPC taxane?
From findings F1 (11 statements in 3 sources) and F4 (17 statements from 2 speakers in 7 sources). The report shows what clinicians said and the sources behind it; it does not settle the question.
By the numbers
- 20commentary sources screened
- 9sources cited by verified statements
- 3named in screened sources
- 3speakers cited in the report
- 3cited speakers with a verified identity
2 cited clinicians, speakers with a confirmed clinical role, of them 2 physicians. By role and specialty:
- 1 physician, Medical oncology
- 1 physician, Urology
Also in the sources: 1 organizational or shared account, not counted as people.
- 61verified statements, each linked to its source
- 10of them from speakers with a confirmed clinical role
- 5findings
Built by AI from public clinician commentary, checked by automated review; every statement links to its source.
A cited clinician is a cited speaker whose clinical role the NPI registry or their own institution's staff page confirms; a role a source only states is not counted. A verified identity says who a speaker is, with or without such a role. Physicians are clinicians whose confirmed role is a physician's.
Counts show what the report kept, not how many clinicians hold a view. Size is set by the verified statements; Standard and Deep need 5 or more cited clinicians. Statements from sponsors, hosts and organisations are labelled and count apart.
What's inside
| Section | Items | Access |
|---|---|---|
| Findings with interpretation, counterviews and limits | 5 | Titles free |
| Detailed analysis | 8 sections | Paid |
| Verified statements with short source quotes and links | 61 | Paid |
| Who said each statement: the cited speakers | 3 | Every edition |
| Speakers with a clinical role confirmed by the NPI registry or a staff page | 2 | Every edition |
| Speakers with verified IDs as data (NPI, ORCID, staff page) | 3 | Every edition |
| CMS-reported financial relationships (Open Payments, by company) for NPI-linked speakers | Included | Every edition |
| Trial aspects mapped | 9 | Free |
| Sources with links | 9 | Counts free |
| MCP access for your AI agent, same license key | Included | Every edition |
Every edition names who said each statement, with MCP access for your AI agent. Each verified speaker comes with their verified IDs (NPI, ORCID, staff page) so your team can check each attribution. Allowed: advisory boards, scientific exchange and finding investigators, under your own compliance process. Not allowed: sales or marketing to clinicians.
Trial aspects
9 discussed · 0 no commentary found · 0 assessment incomplete| Aspect | Statements | Sources |
|---|---|---|
| Primary endpoint: Overall Survival (OS) | 3 | 3 |
| Secondary endpoints | 3 | 3 |
| Population and setting | 16 | 5 |
| The comparisonThe registered arms and what clinicians said about how they compare. | 6 | 4 |
| Safety and tolerability | 8 | 4 |
| Design and conduct | 11 | 6 |
| Resistance biology and upstream steroid blockade in mCRPC | 19 | 7 |
| Mutation-guided selection and ctDNA interpretation | 11 | 3 |
| Recruitment, access and anticipated treatment role | 4 | 1 |
Discussed means at least one verified statement addresses the aspect, not that every question in it is covered: gaps inside a discussed aspect are listed under Scope and limits, and the full report gives each aspect its own limitations. No commentary found means none in the sources read. Assessment incomplete marks an aspect with no statement found while known source limits apply.
Sources
61 verified statements from 9 cited sources. A video or podcast is one source but often carries many statements, so the table counts statements, not just posts.
| Channel | Statements | Cited | Screened | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Video & audio · 32 statements · 52%from 3 videos and episodes · about 11 per source | ||||
| YouTube | 28 | 2 | 2 | |
| Podcasts | 4 | 1 | 1 | |
| Posts · 18 statements · 30%from 4 posts · about 5 per source | ||||
| X threads | 9 | 3 | 16 | |
| LinkedIn posts | 9 | 1 | 1 | |
| Primary sources · 11 statements · 18%cited for context, not screened · from 2 sources · about 6 per source | ||||
| Publications | 10 | 1 | — | |
| Registry | 1 | 1 | — | |
Screened: found and read for this trial. Cited: backs at least one statement. Bar = statements; a statement drawn from two sources counts half to each. How we sourced and checked this
max 4 / quarter
- Screened window
- Jan 5, 2024 → Nov 6, 2026
- Cited window
- Apr 30, 2025 → Oct 23, 2026
- Retrieved
- Nov 14, 2026
The trial
from ClinicalTrials.gov- Title
- MK-5684-004: A Phase 3, Randomized, Open-label Study of Opevesostat Versus Alternative Abiraterone Acetate or Enzalutamide in Participants With Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) That Progressed On or After Prior Treatment With One Next-generation Hormonal Agent (NHA) (OMAHA-004)
- Registry
- NCT06136650
- Study IDs
- 5684-004 · MK-5684-004 (MSD) · jRCT2031240030 (Japan Registry of Clinical Trial (jRCT)) · 2023-504957-11-00 (EU CT) · U1111-1288-5002 (UTN)
- Sponsor
- Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC
- Design
- Phase 3 · Interventional, randomized, parallel
- Status
- Recruiting
- Enrollment
- 1,314 estimated
- Registered
- 2023-11-18
- Start
- 2023-12-18 actual
- Primary completion
- 2028-05-10 estimated
- Primary endpoint
- Overall Survival (OS)
- Interventions
- 7 registered
More on: Prostate cancer
Discussed at: 2026 ASCO Annual Meeting
Scope and limits
This report does not judge efficacy, estimate HCP prevalence or consensus or give treatment advice.
- Discussion that does not name the trial may be missing from this edition.
- 52 statements in the sources reviewed for this edition are about other patients or topics, or only mention the trial, and are not counted.
- Further source limits: 18 sources about other trials or topics are not included.
- The sources reviewed describe selected public discussion, not a representative sample of HCP opinion or treatment practice.
- Discussion that does not use the trial identifier or recognized trial names may be missing.
Show all 11 known gaps +Fewer −
- Some speakers' identities or clinical roles are not established in the sources used in this report; each statement is attributed only as far as its source shows.
- No OMAHA-004 comparative efficacy or safety outcomes are provided. Earlier-study response figures, mechanistic assertions and future treatment expectations must remain separate from phase 3 findings.
- The registry and publication describe different endpoint hierarchies. The registry records the OS amendment sequence, but the descriptions should not be collapsed into one undated account.
- Earlier-study populations, response definitions and mutation-prevalence estimates are not sufficiently aligned to support direct numerical comparisons.
- The video names an earlier study C-Beta; other sources name CYPIDES. Their identity should not be assumed from similar subject matter.
- Recruitment and access statements describe what was reported at the time, not current site availability or access outside research.
How reports are built and checked: Methods.
Editions and corrections
Last checked for new commentary Nov 14, 2026 UTC. No changes. Follow new editions and changes in this report's change feed (JSON Feed), or the catalog's. How versions and corrections work.
Cite this report
Erudio Health. OMAHA-004 (NCT06136650): HCP commentary report. Edition 1, v1.0.0. Accepted Nov 14, 2026. https://www.erudio.com/reports/omaha-004-nct06136650
For your AI agent
Paste this into ChatGPT, Claude, Microsoft Copilot or your own agent. It previews this report through the free Erudio MCP server, tells you whether it answers your question, and orders it if you ask. Some agents ask you to confirm pasted instructions before acting; that is expected.
Help me decide whether to buy the Erudio report "OMAHA-004" (NCT06136650), and buy it for me if I ask. Erudio reports cover what clinicians say in public about one clinical trial, with every verified statement linked to its source.
1. Use the free Erudio MCP server at https://mcp.erudio.com/free; it needs no sign-in. Nothing needs installing: if it is not connected in this app and you can make HTTP requests, call it directly with JSON-RPC POSTs to that URL (initialize, then tools/call), sending "Accept: application/json, text/event-stream". Call get_report_card with slug "omaha-004-nct06136650". If you cannot make requests, read https://www.erudio.com/reports/omaha-004-nct06136650.md instead.
2. In a few lines, tell me what the report covers: its findings, its verified statements and sources, its evidence window, what it leaves out, and the price of each product (offer). Then ask what I need it for, and say plainly whether this report answers it.
3. If I want it, ask for my work email, my organization and the product: the current edition, or 3, 6 or 12 months of updates. Call create_order with report "NCT06136650", that product, email and organization, then show me the quote and the checkout_url to pay by card. If you have a wallet with a payment client for HTTP 402 (MPP with USDC on Tempo, or x402 with USDC on Base) and I agree, you can pay the pay_url instead. Nothing is charged until one is paid.
4. Once it is paid, call get_order with the status_url: it returns my license key. Then use the Erudio MCP server at https://mcp.erudio.com/mcp with the header "Authorization: Bearer <key>". Call read_report with report_id NCT06136650 and sections ["all"], and summarize the findings for me with their sources. The full report can be long: save the response to a file and work from it rather than printing it. If you cannot, read sections ["narratives"] first, the executive summary and analysis.
When you tell me what clinicians said, give each view as theirs, with its source. Counts are the sources the report kept, not the share of clinicians who agree. Reports are not medical advice.
Keep the key private to my organization.Or read the record directly: JSON, Markdown or MCP
curl https://www.erudio.com/reports/omaha-004-nct06136650.json
curl https://www.erudio.com/reports/omaha-004-nct06136650.md
# MCP, no sign-in (https://mcp.erudio.com/free)
get_report_card({ "slug": "omaha-004-nct06136650" })release 964256a45296bdaf9a0012c39cbe94b1d0b58ef67a7050f27793c8b8aa8cdfc6
Questions
How much does the OMAHA-004 report cost?
This edition is below our minimum for clinicians and sources, so it is not for sale yet. Contact us if you are still interested.
What does the OMAHA-004 report cover?
61 statements from 9 sources (1 podcast, 2 videos, 4 posts, 1 paper, 1 registry record), 10 of them from 2 confirmed clinicians, each linked to its source. Commentary checked Nov 14, 2026. The report separates what clinicians said from what primary sources establish; it does not judge efficacy or estimate consensus.
Can my AI agent read or buy the OMAHA-004 report?
Its preview, yes: get_report_card({ "slug": "omaha-004-nct06136650" }) on https://mcp.erudio.com/free, with no sign-in. It cannot be ordered yet. Connect your AI client.
How current is the OMAHA-004 report?
Edition 1 (version 1.0.0), accepted Nov 14, 2026 UTC; last checked for new commentary Nov 14, 2026 UTC. Your plan includes every new edition published during its term. We automatically check subscribed trials for new commentary every week.