Weekly Administration of Gemcitabine Plus Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer: A Phase 1 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of gemcitabine plus docetaxel, both given on a weekly schedule, in patients with pretreated metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: Heavily pretreated patients with MBC, aged 18-75 years with World Health Organization performance status of 0-2 were enrolled. Three escalating weekly doses of docetaxel (30, 35 and 40 mg/m(2)) followed by a weekly fixed dose of gemcitabine, 800 mg/m(2), were administered on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) included grade > 3 hematologic toxicity and grade > 2 stomatitis, asthenia, diarrhea or organ-specific toxicity (except alopecia). Dose escalation was stopped if > or = 3 of 5 patients at any dose level experienced DLT. RESULTS: Eighteen patients (median age 56 years) received a mean of 4.1 (range 1-6) cycles. Asthenia, stomatitis and leukopenia were the main DLTs. One of 5 patients had DLT at dose level 1 and 2 of 5 patients at dose level 2. At dose level 3, 3 of 5 patients had DLTs. Three additional patients treated at dose level 3 confirmed that the MTD had been reached. Therefore, the recommended docetaxel dose in combination with gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) for phase II studies was established at the next lower dose, 35 mg/m(2). Of 12 evaluable patients, 7 (58%) achieved an objective response. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2) plus docetaxel 35 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle is a safe regimen which shows activity in heavily pretreated patients with MBC. Further phase II investigations with this combination are now warranted.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".