MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127680641 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-05-2255

Phase II Clinical Trial Results Involving Treatment with Low-Dose Daily Oral Cyclophosphamide, Weekly Vinblastine, and Rofecoxib in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

2006· article· en· W2127680641 on OpenAlexaff
Scott D. Young, Mark Whissell, Jonathan Noble, Pablo Cano, Pedro García López, Colin Germond

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAngiogenesis and VEGF in Cancer
Canadian institutionsSudbury Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineMucositisNeutropeniaCyclophosphamideChemotherapyGastroenterologyVinblastineRegimenSurgeryClinical endpointPerformance statusPhases of clinical researchClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Preclinical studies indicate that conventional chemotherapeutic agents given continuously at low doses (metronomic chemotherapy) may provide an improved therapeutic index. Cyclophosphamide and vinblastine have been best studied in experimental models, where tumor growth inhibition is achieved, at least in part, through antiangiogenic mechanisms. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Fifty patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in this phase II trial, 43 of whom had received at least one prior chemotherapy regimen. Patients were required to have Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of < or = 2, a life expectancy of >3 months, and at least one measurable lesion. All patients received oral cyclophosphamide (50 mg) and rofecoxib (25 mg) daily in addition to weekly injections of vinblastine (3 mg/m2). Half of the patients also received minocycline (100 mg) orally twice daily with the intent of further inhibiting tumor angiogenesis. The primary end point of the study was clinical benefit, defined as the percentage of patients experiencing an objective response or exhibiting stable disease for at least 6 months. RESULTS: For the 47 eligible patients, there were two (4%) complete responses and four (9%) partial responses, for an overall objective response rate of 13%. An additional eight patients achieved disease stabilization (stable disease > or = 6 months) (17%). The primary end point of clinical benefit was therefore 30%, (95% confidence interval, 16-44%). The median progression-free survival for all patients was 103 days and 289 days for patients experiencing clinical benefit. The incidence of patients experiencing grade 3/4 toxicities were as follows: neutropenia (10/2), anemia (2/0), and thrombocytopenia (1/0). No patients developed grade 3 or 4 nausea, vomiting, mucositis, or alopecia. CONCLUSIONS: This low-dose regimen consisting of daily oral cyclophosphamide and weekly vinblastine injections given concurrently with rofecoxib is associated with minimal toxicity and provides significant clinical benefit to patients with advanced solid tumors. These results are particularly encouraging given the nature of the study population and indicate that this approach merits further investigation in specific disease site studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.381 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations111
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicAngiogenesis and VEGF in CancerFrench-language works237,207