MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069868586 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.196

Population pharmacokinetic modeling of motesanib and its active metabolite, M4, in cancer patients

2015· article· en· W2069868586 on OpenAlexaff
Nathalie Gosselin, Samer Mouksassi, Jianfeng Lü, Cheng‐Pang Hsu

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacokineticsDosingCovariatePopulationDemographicsMetaboliteActive metaboliteInternal medicinePharmacologyOncologyDemographyStatisticsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motesanib is a small molecule and potent multikinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic and antitumor activity. Population pharmacokinetic (POPPK) modeling of motesanib and M4, an active metabolite, was performed to assess sources of variability in cancer patients. The analysis included data collected from 451 patients from 8 clinical trials with oral doses of motesanib ranging from 25 to 175 mg, either once daily or twice daily. The POPPK analyses were performed using nonlinear mixed-effect models with a sequential approach. Covariate effects of demographics and other baseline characteristics were assessed with stepwise covariate modeling. A 2-compartment model with food effect on absorption parameters fitted the PK data of motesanib well. The effects albumin and sex on apparent clearance (CL/F) of motesanib were statistically significant. The albumin effect was more important but remained below a 25% difference. A 1-compartment model fitted PK data of M4 well. Effects of race (Asian vs non-Asian) and dosing frequency were identified as statistically significant covariates on the CL/F of M4. The maximum effect of albumin would result in less than 25% change in motesanib CL/F and as such would not warrant any dosing adjustment. However, faster elimination of M4 in Asian patients requires further investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207