MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171046634 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-0761

Phase I Study of Cediranib in Combination with Oxaliplatin and Infusional 5-Fluorouracil in Patients with Advanced Colorectal Cancer

2009· article· en· W2171046634 on OpenAlexaff
Eric X. Chen, Derek J. Jonker, Isabelle Gauthier, Martha MacLean, Julie Wells, Jean Powers, Lesley Seymour

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersSanofiAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineOxaliplatinPharmacokineticsTolerabilityFOLFOXInternal medicineColorectal cancerFluorouracilRegimenDosingPharmacologyOncologyPhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyToxicityChemotherapyCancerAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Cediranib is a potent oral inhibitor of the tyrosine kinase activity associated with all subtypes of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor. Purposes of this study were to determine the recommended phase II dose of cediranib in combination with standard doses of modified FOLFOX-6 (mFOLFOX-6), and the tolerability, safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of this combination in patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Cediranib was administered daily orally at a starting dose of 30 mg and escalated to 45 mg daily, and mFOLFOX-6 was repeated every 14 days. Pharmacokinetic studies were done for oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and cediranib. Response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors every four cycles. RESULTS: Sixteen patients received 150 cycles of treatment (median, 6; range, 1-20 cycles). Of 9 patients enrolled at the 30-mg dose level, 1 patient experienced grade 3 diarrhea during cycle 1. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed in 7 patients at the 45-mg dose level. Common grade 3 toxicities related to cediranib included hypertension, diarrhea, fatigue, and anorexia. Of 14 patients evaluable for response, there were 6 partial responses (42.9%; 95% confidence interval, 17.7-71.1%) and 6 stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 9.3 months. There were no pharmacokinetic interactions between cediranib and 5-fluorouracil or free plasma intact oxaliplatin. CONCLUSIONS: Toxicities of this combination were manageable and consistent with previous studies. The recommended phase II dose is cediranib at 30 mg daily continuously in combination with standard doses of mFOLFOX-6. Cediranib and mFOLFOX-6 has promising antitumor activity and this combination warrants further investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicColorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesFrench-language works237,207