MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Effect of Increasing Zoledronic Acid Dose and Infusion Rate on Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Renal Function in Patients with Multiple Myeloma.

2004· article· en· W2576909123 on OpenAlexaff
James R. Berenson, Pierre Major, Christina Ravera, Sanela Bilic, Horst Schran

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineZoledronic acidPharmacokineticsCmaxMultiple myelomaRegimenRenal functionAdverse effectPharmacodynamicsInternal medicineUrologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Zoledronic acid is a new-generation bisphosphonate with demonstrated efficacy and safety in the treatment of bone lesions in patients with multiple myeloma and solid tumors using a monthly regimen of 4 mg infused over 15 minutes. This phase I open-label study investigated the pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of a monthly regimen of zoledronic acid, at doses of 4, 8, and 12 mg, using an infusion rates model predicted to yield a Cmax similar to that for 4 mg infused over 15 minutes. Methods: Patients received a total of 6 doses of zoledronic acid administered every 28 days: 4 mg via 15-minute infusion on day 1, 8 mg via 60-minute infusion on days 29 and 57, 12 mg via 120-minute infusion on days 85 and 113, and 4 mg via 15-minute infusion on day 141. Assessments of PK, PD (bone and tumor marker levels), and safety (biochemistry, hematology, and renal function) were completed after each dose. Results: A total of 10 patients (6 male, 4 female) with multiple myeloma were enrolled and 7 completed the 6-month study (1 patient withdrew consent, 2 patients had abnormal lab values). Median age was 57.5 years (range, 42 to 75 years). ECOG performance status was 0 or 1 in 9 patients and 2 in 1 patient. Eight of 10 patients had received prior antineoplastic therapy and all patients had received prior radiation and surgery. Zoledronic acid was generally well tolerated; the most commonly reported adverse events involved the known acute-phase reactions, namely fatigue (60%), myalgia (50%), and arthralgia/nausea/bone pain (40% each), associated with IV bisphosphonates. Transient serum creatinine elevations from baseline were observed in 3 patients and resulted in either dose delay/decrease (n = 1) or discontinuation after Infusion 5 (n = 2). A single serious adverse event was reported in 1 patient (secondary malignancy to the left lung). Clinically significant (grade 3/4) nonrenal-related adverse events occurred in 5 patients. No patient discontinued due to clinically significant adverse events nor died while on study. Mean Cmax (± SD) was 329 (± 84) mg/L after the first 4-mg dose (Infusion 1), 407 (± 99) mg/L after the second 8-mg dose (Infusion 3), and 411 (± 75) mg/L after the second 12-mg dose (Infusion 5). These values were nearly identical to the model-extrapolated values. Mean observed AUC0–6h (± SD) was 403 (± 135), 877 (± 177), and 1,233 (± 259) after Infusions 1, 3, and 5, respectively. Mean modeled AUC0–24h (± SD) was 603 (± 189), 1,489 (± 451), and 1,662 (± 325) for the same infusion schedule. Decreases from baseline were observed in serum markers of bone metabolism (CTX, NTX, and osteocalcin) after zoledronic acid treatment. There were no relevant changes from baseline in serum interleukin-6, quantitative immunoglobulins, C-reactive protein, or albumin. Conclusions: Zoledronic acid was safe and well tolerated when infused at doses of 8 and 12 mg over 60 and 120 minutes, respectively, and the model-predicted Cmax of zoledronic acid was achieved in patients with multiple myeloma at all doses and infusion rates tested. This study provides a rationale for investigating doses ≥ 4 mg infused over > 15 minutes in a broader clinical trial. Updated analyses will be presented.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→