A Phase I Dose Finding Study of Cisplatin, Gemcitabine, and Weekly Docetaxel for Patients With Advanced Transitional Cell Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Efficacious regimens are needed for the treatment of metastatic bladder cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the toxicity and phase II dose of a triplet regimen of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and weekly docetaxel for patients with advanced transitional cell carcinoma. METHODS: Thirteen patients were enrolled to the study: 3 to dose level 1 (cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1; gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, day 1 and 8; and docetaxel 30 mg/m2, day 1 and 8, every 21 days), and 10 to dose level -1 (cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1; gemcitabine 800 mg/m2, day 1 and 8; and docetaxel 30 mg/m2, day 1 and 8, every 21 days). RESULTS: Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (40%) and thrombocytopenia (20%). Grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity was restricted to diarrhea. There were 2 early deaths: 1 from a suspected pulmonary embolism and another from sepsis. In 11 patients who received > or =2 cycles the response rate was 73%. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended phase II dose of this triplet regimen in advanced transitional cell carcinoma is cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1; gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 day 1 and 8; and docetaxel 30 mg/m2 day 1 and 8, repeated every 21 days. The preliminary objective response rate was high in this cohort of patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".