Assessment of systemic toxicity in children receiving chemotherapy with cyclosporine for sarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Overexpression of P-glycoprotein in malignant tumors has been associated with poor responses to chemotherapy. It appears biologically plausible that addition of the P-glycoprotein inhibitor cyclosporine (CsA) to standard chemotherapy may improve the outcome. The protective functions of P-glycoprotein in healthy tissues, however, have not been fully elucidated. Addition of CsA may lead to increased systemic chemotherapy toxicity, so we compared the rate and severity of chemotherapy-associated systemic toxicity in the presence and absence of CsA. PROCEDURE: Standard chemotherapy consisted of etoposide/ifosfamide (VP16/IFOS) cycles, alternating with vincristine/dactinomycin/cyclophosphamide (VAC) cycles. CsA was given at a median dose of 20 mg/kg with unaltered doses of the antineoplastic drugs. The analysis of toxicity was performed by comparing clinically significant toxicity events recorded during and after chemotherapy cycles with and without CsA. RESULTS: Toxicity-related hospital admissions occurred after 93% of VAC cycles with CsA compared to 40% of the cycles without CsA (P < 0. 0001); 29% of VP16/IFOS cycles with CsA led to admissions vs. 12% with non-CsA cycles (P = 0.04). Infections or fever and neutropenia were the main reasons for these admissions. Thirty-seven percent of the VAC cycles with CsA were complicated by culture-proved sepsis, which did not occur in cycles without CsA (P < 0.0001). Requirements for blood and platelet transfusions were greatly increased after VAC cycles with CsA compared to VAC cycles without CsA. CONCLUSIONS: The chemosensitizer CsA increases the systemic toxicity of VAC chemotherapy in patients with sarcomas. Future trials of chemotherapy with chemosensitizers will have to take into account a potential increase in systemic toxicity. Careful monitoring of chemotherapy-related toxicity becomes mandatory in such studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".