MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pharmacokinetics of doxorubicin administered i.v. as Myocet (TLC D-99; liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin citrate) compared with conventional doxorubicin when given in combination with cyclophosphamide in patients with metastatic breast cancer

2003· article· en· W2325764269 on OpenAlexaff
Christine E. Swenson, Lois E. Bolcsak, Gerald Batist, Troy H. Guthrie, Katherine H. R. Tkaczuk, Harold Boxenbaum, Lauri Welles, Shein‐Chung Chow, R.K. Bhamra, Philip Chaikin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnti-Cancer Drugs · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoxorubicinPharmacokineticsMetastatic breast cancerLiposomeMedicineBreast cancerPharmacologyCyclophosphamideCancerChemotherapyChemistryInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myocet (TLC D-99) is a liposomal formulation of the anti-neoplastic drug doxorubicin with an improved therapeutic index compared with conventional doxorubicin. The objective of this study was to assess the plasma disposition of doxorubicin when administered i.v. as TLC D-99 and to compare this to conventional drug. Metabolite (doxorubicinol) plasma levels were also quantitated in both treatment groups. Plasma was collected during the first course of treatment from 10 patients receiving TLC D-99 60 mg/m and 10 receiving conventional doxorubicin 60 mg/m2, each with cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m2. Samples were assayed for total doxorubicin (all doxorubicin regardless of whether it is encapsulated or not), encapsulated doxorubicin (TLC D-99 group only) and doxorubicinol using high-performance liquid chromatography. Plasma concentrations of total doxorubicin were higher in patients receiving TLC D-99 than in patients receiving conventional doxorubicin. The clearance of total doxorubicin after administration of TLC D-99 was lower (approximately 9-fold) and the volume of distribution at steady state was less (25-fold) than that of doxorubicin after conventional drug. Doxorubicinol was detected in the plasma of all patients in both treatment groups. The mean AUC(0-infinity) of doxorubicinol for patients receiving TLC D-99 (1.5+/-0.4 M x h) was not statistically different than that in patients receiving conventional doxorubicin (1.8+/-0.4 M x h), although the appearance of the peak doxorubicinol concentration occurred later and was lower in patients receiving TLC D-99. There was a correlation between the plasma AUC(0-infinity) of total doxorubicin and the degree of myelosuppression in patients receiving conventional doxorubicin, but this correlation was not found in patients receiving TLC D-99.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations115
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnti-Cancer DrugsSame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207