MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024102326 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am10-lb-75

Abstract LB-75: Concomitant use of panitumumab (Pmab) had no clinically significant effect on irinotecan (Iri) pharmacokinetics (PK)

2010· article· en· W2024102326 on OpenAlexaff
Hagen F. Kennecke, Chi‐Yuan Wu, Eric X. Chen, Jeffrey R. Infante, Alin Chen, Bing Gao, Brian P. Smith, Jason B. Litten, Bingbing Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCmaxPharmacokineticsIrinotecanAdverse effectConcomitantColorectal cancerInternal medicineClinical endpointGastroenterologyUrologyPharmacologyOncologyCancerClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Pmab, a fully human monoclonal antibody to the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), is indicated for treatment of EGFR-expressing, chemorefractory, metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study examined effects of Pmab on Iri PK when used as combination therapy in patients (pts) with mCRC. Methods: This phase 1, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study enrolled pts with mCRC without prior exposure to an EGFR inhibitor. Pts could not have CYP3A4 inhibiting or inducing medications ≥ 2 weeks before enrollment or UGT1A1*28 TA7/7, TA7/8, and TA8/8 polymorphisms. Pts received Iri (180 mg/m2, 90-min IV infusion) on day 1 cycle 1 followed by Pmab (6 mg/kg, 60-min IV infusion) on day 4 cycle 1. After 2 weeks (day 1 cycle 2), pts received Pmab followed immediately by Iri. Pmab and Iri were administered thereafter every 2 weeks until disease progression or intolerability. Plasma samples for Iri and its active metabolite SN-38 were collected pre-dose and up to 72 hours after Iri infusion in cycles 1 and 2. Primary endpoints were Cmax and AUC of Iri (PK subset), and secondary endpoints included rates of adverse events (AEs). Results: 28 pts enrolled; 19 of 27 pts who received treatment met PK evaluability criteria (dosed per protocol for 2 cycles with no reductions/delays). PK profiles of Iri with or without Pmab were nearly superimposable. 90% confidence intervals for the ratios of geometric means for Iri Cmax and AUC with or without Pmab were within a prespecified 0.70 to 1.43 interval, suggesting that Pmab had no impact on Iri PK. Similar results were seen for SN-38 PK. AEs were as expected for Iri plus Pmab combination therapy. Conclusions: Pmab in combination with Iri was generally well tolerated by pts with mCRC. Pmab had no significant effects on Iri PK.PK Profiles of Iri and SN-38 Ratio of Geometric Means Point Estimate Cycle (N = 19)Geometric Mean(Cycle 2 vs Cycle 1)90% CIIri Cmax (ng/mL)115400.9800.894 - 1.074 21510 AUC0-inf (ng·hr/mL)1112000.8980.819-0.985 210100 SN-38 Cmax (ng/mL)125.90.8230.731-0.926 221.3 AUC0-inf (ng·hr/mL)1a3260.8650.773 - 0.968 2b282 aN = 17; bN = 16; CI, Confidence interval; Iri, Irinotecan Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 101st Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2010 Apr 17-21; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2010;70(8 Suppl):Abstract nr LB-75.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207