A Comparative Analysis of Low-Dose Metronomic Cyclophosphamide Reveals Absent or Low-Grade Toxicity on Tissues Highly Sensitive to the Toxic Effects of Maximum Tolerated Dose Regimens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The survival benefits of traditional maximum tolerated dose (MTD) cytotoxic therapy have been modest for the treatment of most types of metastatic malignancy and, moreover, often come with increased acute and chronic toxicity. Recent studies have demonstrated that the frequent administration of comparatively low doses of cytotoxic agents, with no extended breaks [low-dose metronomic (LDM) chemotherapy], may not only be at least as efficient as MTD therapy but also less toxic. This coincides with an apparent selectivity for "activated" endothelial cells of the tumor vasculature. However, the impact of LDM chemotherapy on the most sensitive target cell populations normally affected by MTD therapy (i.e., bone marrow progenitors, gut mucosa, and hair follicle cells) has not been analyzed in experimental detail. Therefore, we compared effects of LDM and MTD cyclophosphamide (CTX) on bone marrow and gut mucosa. Furthermore, we studied the potential impact of LDM CTX on angiogenesis in the context of wound healing and evidence of organ toxicity. We show absent or moderate hematologic and intestinal toxicity of LDM as opposed to MTD CTX. Of note was the finding of sustained lymphopenia, which is not unexpected given the use of CTX as immunosuppressive drug. There was no negative impact on wound healing or evidence of organ toxicity. LDM offers clear safety advantages over conventional MTD chemotherapy and therefore would appear to be ideal for long-term combination therapy with targeted antiangiogenic drugs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".