Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Efficacy of Trastuzumab Administered Every Three Weeks in Combination With Paclitaxel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This phase II study evaluated the pharmacokinetics and safety of trastuzumab and paclitaxel given every 3 weeks to women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients received a loading dose of trastuzumab 8 mg/kg intravenously (day 1) and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (day 0). Thereafter, trastuzumab 6 mg/kg was administered on the same day as paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks for seven cycles. In responding patients, trastuzumab monotherapy every 3 weeks was then continued until disease progression or patient withdrawal. RESULTS: Trastuzumab trough levels were more than 20 mug/mL by the end of cycle 1. The half-life of trastuzumab was estimated to be 18 to 27 days, although this may be an underestimate. The combination of paclitaxel and trastuzumab was generally well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicities and no pharmacokinetic interaction. The most common adverse events were myalgia, paresthesias, alopecia, arthralgia, and fatigue. Events associated with trastuzumab included infusion-related reactions and cardiac dysfunction. Ten patients had a > or = 15% decrease in ejection fraction, but only one had symptomatic heart failure. The investigator-assessed objective response rate was 59% (four complete and 15 partial responses) and seven patients (22%) had stable disease. The median duration of response was 10.5 months and median time to progression was 12.2 months. CONCLUSION: Additional investigation of trastuzumab administered every 3 weeks is warranted. In combination with paclitaxel, it is generally well tolerated. Plasma trastuzumab trough levels and clinical response rates compare favorably with those achieved with the standard weekly trastuzumab regimen plus chemotherapy. The presence of trastuzumab does not alter exposure to paclitaxel.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".