A Phase I Study of Flavopiridol in Combination With Gemcitabine and Irinotecan in Patients With Metastatic Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Flavopiridol (HMR 1275) is a synthetic flavone with antineoplastic properties through inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor. Flavopiridol synergizes in a sequence-dependent fashion with chemotherapy. Major adverse events of flavopiridol in single agent phase I studies are secretory diarrhea, neutropenia, thrombosis, and fatigue. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were treated with gemcitabine 800 mg/m and irinotecan 80 mg/m on day 1, followed by flavopiridol, starting dose of 30 mg/m on day 2 with increment of 15 mg/m per dose level, repeated on days 8 and 9 for the first 6 patients (3-week cycle), and then repeated on days 15 and 16 for the remainder patients (4-week cycle). The protocol had to be amended for inability to redose after 1 week. RESULTS: Fourteen women and 7 men with advanced solid tumors were enrolled. The median age was 51 years and the median number of prior chemotherapies was 3 (0-9). Neutropenic sepsis (1 patient), grade 3 diarrhea (1 patient), and neutropenia (2 patients) preventing retreatment on day 8 were observed among the 6 subjects treated on the first schedule. The recommended phase II dose of flavopiridol was 45 mg/m in combination with irinotecan and gemcitabine every 2 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicities were electrolyte imbalance with fatigue (1 patient), and renal failure and dyspnea with hypoxia (1 patient each), seen at 45 and 60 mg/m doses, respectively. The most common side effects were fatigue (81%), nausea (71%), diarrhea (67%), transient myelosuppression (43%), and vomiting (24%). CONCLUSIONS: The every 2 week dosing is well tolerated with a phase II recommended dose of 45 mg/m of flavopiridol in combination with irinotecan (80 mg/m) and gemcitabine (800 mg/m).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".