MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141030907 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.48

Differential Pharmacokinetics of Ganitumab in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Versus Other Advanced Solid Cancers

2013· article· en· W2141030907 on OpenAlexaff
Min Zhu, Nathalie Gosselin, Mita Kuchimanchi, Jessica Johnson, Ian McCaffery, Samer Mouksassi, Elwyn Loh, Jianfeng Lü

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGemcitabineMedicinePancreatic cancerPharmacokineticsOncologyInternal medicineVolume of distributionResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsCancerClinical trialPharmacologyPhases of clinical research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ganitumab is an investigational, fully human monoclonal antibody antagonist of the insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor (IGF1R) that has shown trends towards improved progression-free survival and overall survival in a phase 2 pancreatic cancer clinical trial. To characterize ganitumab pharmacokinetics (PK) and identify factors affecting PK, ganitumab serum concentration data from three clinical trials were analyzed. The PK of ganitumab as monotherapy and in combination with gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic or non-pancreatic cancer were assessed with a non-linear mixed-effect model. We found that ganitumab exhibited linear and time-invariant kinetics. A two-compartment model adequately described data over a dose range of 1-20 mg/kg with good predictive capability. Typical clearance and central volume of distribution values were 1.7- and 1.3-fold higher, respectively, in patients with pancreatic cancer than in patients with other advanced solid cancers, resulting in lower ganitumab exposure. Covariate analysis was used to evaluate effects of cancer type, gemcitabine coadministration, clinical study, demographics, and laboratory values on ganitumab PK. Pancreatic cancer type was the most significant covariate on clearance along with weight, albumin, and serum creatinine. Gemcitabine coadministration did not affect ganitumab clearance. Thus, disease state can significantly affect PK and should be considered when selecting the clinically effective dose.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207