Phase II Study of Activated Charcoal to Prevent Irinotecan-Induced Diarrhea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The dose-limiting toxicity of irinotecan (CPT-11; Camptosar) is delayed-onset diarrhea, with an incidence at the grade 3 to 4 level of 20% to 35%. SN38, its active moiety, is responsible by a direct effect on mucosal topoisomerase-I. The aim of this study was to assess whether activated charcoal (AC), possibly by adsorbing free lumenal SN38, can reduce irinotecan-induced diarrhea (CID) and optimize its dose-intensity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving irinotecan 125 mg/m(2) intravenously once a week for 4 weeks every 6 weeks were studied. In cycle 1, patients received irinotecan plus AC (5 mL aqueous Charcodote [1,000 mg AC] plus 25 mL water) given the evening before the irinotecan dose and then tid for 48 hours after the dose. In cycle 2, no AC was given. National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria diarrhea grade, irinotecan dose-intensity, and loperamide consumption were recorded prospectively in both cycles. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients had completed cycle 1 with AC; 24 subsequently completed cycle 2 without AC. Grade 3 to 4 diarrhea was 7.1% v 25%, and grade 0 diarrhea was 46.4% v 20.8% in cycles 1 and 2, respectively. Median percent planned dose delivered was 98% v 70% in cycles 1 and 2, respectively. In cycles 1 and 2, respectively, 25% v 54% patients took more than 10 loperamide tablets. AC was well tolerated with excellent compliance. CONCLUSION: The administration of AC with irinotecan reduced the incidence of grade 3 to 4 diarrhea and antidiarrheal medication consumption and increased irinotecan dose-intensity. Prophylactic AC may have a role in reducing dose-limiting CID and optimizing irinotecan 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 | 0.001 | 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".