High-Dose Intravenous Vitamin C Combined with Cytotoxic Chemotherapy in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Phase I-II Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biological and some clinical evidence suggest that high-dose intravenous vitamin C (IVC) could increase the effectiveness of cancer chemotherapy. IVC is widely used by integrative and complementary cancer therapists, but rigorous data are lacking as to its safety and which cancers and chemotherapy regimens would be the most promising to investigate in detail. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We carried out a phase I-II safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic and efficacy trial of IVC combined with chemotherapy in patients whose treating oncologist judged that standard-of-care or off-label chemotherapy offered less than a 33% likelihood of a meaningful response. We documented adverse events and toxicity associated with IVC infusions, determined pre- and post-chemotherapy vitamin C and oxalic acid pharmacokinetic profiles, and monitored objective clinical responses, mood and quality of life. Fourteen patients were enrolled. IVC was safe and generally well tolerated, although some patients experienced transient adverse events during or after IVC infusions. The pre- and post-chemotherapy pharmacokinetic profiles suggested that tissue uptake of vitamin C increases after chemotherapy, with no increase in urinary oxalic acid excretion. Three patients with different types of cancer experienced unexpected transient stable disease, increased energy and functional improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite IVC's biological and clinical plausibility, career cancer investigators currently ignore it while integrative cancer therapists use it widely but without reporting the kind of clinical data that is normally gathered in cancer drug development. The present study neither proves nor disproves IVC's value in cancer therapy, but it provides practical information, and indicates a feasible way to evaluate this plausible but unproven therapy in an academic environment that is currently uninterested in it. If carried out in sufficient numbers, simple studies like this one could identify specific clusters of cancer type, chemotherapy regimen and IVC in which exceptional responses occur frequently enough to justify appropriately focused clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01050621.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".