Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose ( MTD) , toxicity profile and and recommendation dose of elemene in phase II clinical trial. Methods: Patients with advanced cancers were assigned into cohorts of three participants at each dose level. Initial dosage participants were intravenously infused with was 750 mg·d-1 . The following cohort of participants was treated with an increased dose of 250 mg of elemene. The maximum cohort of participant was infused with a dose of up to 2 000 mg daily. Each cohort of participants was treated once daily for 5 days and then had a break for 2 days, totaling a 28-day cycle of therapy. Sequential dose levels were studied in the absence of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in the previous level. The toxicities were evaluated based on Word Health Organization Toxicity Grading Scale together with National Cancer Institute of Canada Common Toxicity Criteria (NCIC-CTC). Results; A total of 19 advanced cancer patients was enrolled in the trial. The most common treatment-emergent adverse effects were increases of triglyceride (TG) and total cholesterol (CHOL) levels. Other adverse events included febrile non-neutropenia, gastro-intestinal dysfunction and leucopoenia. No correlation was found between the toxicities with the dose level. A clinically defined MTD was not reached e-ven up to dose of 2 000 mg·d-1 . Conclusion; Elemene was well tolerated in the trial setting and the recommendation dose of phase II trial was 1 250 mg·d-1.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".