MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070634470 · doi:10.1159/000225887

Phase I Toxicologic Study of Lonidamine in Cancer Patients

2009· article· en· W2070634470 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSomnolenceMedicineToxicityCancerChemotherapyPhases of clinical researchLung cancerBreast cancerAdverse effectSarcomaInternal medicinePharmacologyGastroenterologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

15 patients with metastatic cancer were treated with Lonidamine, a substituted indazole carboxylic acid active against the Lewis lung and Sarcoma 180 tumors. Single doses of 600 mg (350-400 mg/m2) mostly induced somnolence and gastro-intestinal side effects. Toxicity occurring during chronic administration of Lonidamine at doses ranging between 45 and 275 mg/m2 twice daily, mainly consisted of somnolence, myalgias, hyperesthesia and mild hair loss. Myalgias and hyperesthesias were markedly relieved with prednisone 5 mg twice daily. No laboratory abnormalities were seen. In 1 patient with breast cancer resistant to standard chemotherapeutic agents, a 30% reduction of measurable tumor masses was seen. In view of the lack of overlapping toxicity between Lonidamine and other chemotherapeutic drugs, and of its potential activity, it is suggested that phase II studies of Lonidamine be initiated at a dose of 135 mg/m2 twice daily.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Non-randomized triallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Non-randomized trialhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.414 · 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