MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2405439315

A 3-week gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen for metastatic urothelial cancer.

2004· article· en· W2405439315 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eric Winquist, John J. Wilson, M. Dorreen, Ralph Wong, D. Jonker, N. Iscoe

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGemcitabineTolerabilityRegimenInternal medicinePerformance statusCisplatinProgressive diseaseToxicityChemotherapyOncologyAdverse effect
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of a 3-week outpatient schedule of intravenous gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic transitional cell carcinoma of the urothelial tract (TCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A two-stage phase II trial enrolled TCC patients with Karnofsky performance status > or = 60, measurable disease, and adequate organ function. Prior adjunctive chemotherapy was allowed provided it had been completed at least 1 year prior to study entry. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1250 mg/m2 iv days 1 and 8 plus cisplatin 70 mg/m2 day 1 iv repeated every 21 days. The primary outcome was the objective response rate. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled at six Canadian centres. Three complete and 10 partial responses were observed in 29 eligible patients (overall response rate 45% [95%CI, 27-63%]). Three patients had stable disease and 13 had progressive disease. The relative dose-intensities of gemcitabine and cisplatin were 81% and 88%, respectively. Toxicity was primarily hematological, and 60% of patients experienced at least one episode of grade 3 or 4 toxicity. One patient died of neutropenic sepsis and two died of vascular events while on treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and tolerability of this schedule are similar to that reported with the standard 4-week schedule of gemcitabine-cisplatin. In the absence of a large randomized trial, the similarity of these results supports the use of this 3-week program in typical TCC patients treated in both community and academic cancer clinic settings.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→