Phase II Trial of Irinotecan in Children With Refractory Solid Tumors: A Children's Oncology Group Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A phase II study was performed to determine the efficacy of irinotecan (IRN) in children with refractory solid tumors. Secondary objectives were to evaluate toxicity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and UGT1A1 genotype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 181 patients were enrolled, of whom 171 were eligible. Patients received IRN 50 mg/m2/d for 5 days repeated every 3 weeks. Pharmacokinetic studies and UGT1A1 genotyping were performed. RESULTS: Of 161 patients assessable for response, one patient with hepatoblastoma had a complete response, with partial responses observed in patients with medulloblastoma (n = 4), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 1), neuroblastoma (n = 1), and germinoma (n = 1), for an overall response rate of 5%. Grade 4 neutropenia and grade 3 to 4 diarrhea occurred in less than 7% of the courses administered. Pharmacokinetic studies were available for 79 patients. The mean +/- standard deviation IRN plasma clearance was 374 +/- 148 mL/min/m2, with median relative extent of conversion and relative extent of glucuronidation of 0.05 (range, 0.01 to 0.25) and 2.24 (range, 0.39 to 9.6), respectively. No association between UGT1A1 genotype (n = 61) and toxicity or pharmacokinetic parameters was observed. CONCLUSION: IRN 50 mg/m2/d for 5 days every 21 days is well tolerated, but was not effective as a single agent in a spectrum of solid tumors, with the possible exception of patients with medulloblastoma (16% response rate). There was no association between UGT1A1*28 genotype and toxicity or pharmacokinetic parameters.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Non-randomized trial | high |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it