Pharmacokinetics of Irinotecan With and Without Panitumumab Coadministration in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effects of panitumumab, a human monoclonal antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), on irinotecan pharmacokinetics. This phase I, open-label, multicenter, single-arm study enrolled patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) without prior exposure to an EGFR inhibitor. In cycle 1, patients received irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) intravenously [IV]) on day 1 and panitumumab (6 mg/kg IV) on Day 4. In cycle 2 (2 weeks after cycle 1 panitumumab administration) and subsequent every-2-week cycles, patients received panitumumab followed immediately by irinotecan until disease progression or intolerability. Primary and secondary endpoints included Cmax and AUC of irinotecan after irinotecan infusion in cycles 1 and 2, and adverse events, respectively. Nineteen of 27 treated patients were eligible for pharmacokinetic analysis. Pharmacokinetic profiles of irinotecan with or without panitumumab coadministration were nearly identical. The 90% confidence intervals for ratios of geometric means for irinotecan Cmax and AUC with or without panitumumab were within the 80-125% interval, indicating that panitumumab had no apparent effects on irinotecan pharmacokinetics. Adverse events were as expected for irinotecan plus panitumumab combination therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 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".