MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase 1 study of CPX-1, a fixed ratio formulation of irinotecan (IRI) and floxuridine (FLOX), in patients with advanced solid tumors

2006· article· en· W2247100049 on OpenAlexaff
Gerald Batist, K.N. Chi, Wilson H. Miller, S. Chia, F. Hasanbasic, Ana Fisic, L.D. Mayer, C. Swenson, A S Janoff, Karen A. Gelmon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCelator Pharmaceuticals (Canada)Jewish General HospitalBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacokineticsResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsInternal medicineUrologyCohortPhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyOncologyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2014 Background: In vitro studies have shown that varying the ratio of individual agents in drug combinations can result in synergistic, additive or antagonistic activity against tumor cells. CPX-1 is a liposomal formulation of IRI and FLOX in a fixed 1:1 molar ratio which was selected as optimal in vitro and confirmed to be synergistic in vivo in preclinical tumor models. CPX-1 overcomes the dissimilar pharmacokinetics (PK) of the individual drugs, enables sustained maintenance of this ratio after IV administration, and was evaluated in a Phase I open-label, dose-escalation study. Methods: Starting dose was 30 U/m2 (1 Unit of CPX-1 contains 1 mg IRI + 0.36 mg FLOX) given on day 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Dose escalation was by modified Fibonacci with 4 subjects/cohort. Eligibility included: ≥ 18 yo; advanced solid tumor; ECOG PS ≤ 2; adequate bone marrow/liver/renal function. PK analysis was done on day 1 and 15 of the first cycle. Results: 26 subjects (16M:10F), median age 54.5 y (21–72), all with prior therapy, enrolled in 6 cohorts with the 5th cohort expanded to 6 subjects. Diagnoses: 8 colorectal, 3 pancreatic, 3 ovarian, 2 breast, 2 gastric, 2 esophageal, 2 sarcomas, 1 renal cell, 1 prostate, 1 NSCLC and 1 sphenoid sinus. Response: 20 subjects evaluable: 2 confirmed PRs (NSCLC 8+ wks; Colon 13+ wks, in a patient with prior IRI exposure) and 13 with SD (8–24+wks). Safety: DLTs were observed at the 6th dose level: 4 subjects with DLTs: 3 diarrhea (one resulting in death due to dehydration/ARF) and one neutropenia. Other possibly related grade 3 and 4 events included one each of: grade 3 diarrhea, grade 3 vomiting, grade 3 neutropenia, grade 3 fatigue, grade 3 compression fracture and arthralgia and pulmonary embolism grade 4. PK: In all 14 subjects analyzed to date the 1:1 molar ratio of IRI to FLOX was maintained for 24 hours and metabolites 5-FU and SN-38 were present in the plasma. Conclusions: CPX-1 represents a new approach to developing drug combinations in which drug ratios are pre-selected in vitro based on optimal antitumor activity and maintained systemically through pharmacokinetic control. Phase 2 studies are planned with a recommended dose of 210U/m2 of CPX-1. [Table: see text]

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207