Phase I/II trial of dose reduced capecitabine in elderly or frail patients with untreated advanced colorectal cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
745 Background: Capecitabine (Cape) was initially assessed at a dose of 2500 mg/m2 in young or robust patients that do not represent the population in which oncologists consider Cape monotherapy in advanced colorectal cancer (aCRC). In practice Cape is frequently given to elderly or frail patients at 2000 mg/m2 but the optimal dosing remains controversial. Methods: A multi-centered phase I/II trial of reduced dose Cape 2000 mg/m2 d1–14 q21d was conducted in 221 patients in one or more of the following subsets: age65 years (167 pts), ECOG PS 1 (139 pts), elevated LDH (105 pts), prior pelvic RT (54 pts). Results: Median age was 72 years. A median 5 and mean 8 cycles were given (range 0 to 50). The phase I portion of the study determined prior pelvic radiation required dose reduction to 1500 mg/m2 for diarrhea. Grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 25% of patients during the first 3 cycles (8.1% hand-foot syndrome, 7.7% diarrhea). Dose reductions were required in 14% and dose delays in 21%. Response rate is 13.6%, with 69.7% disease control rate. Median PFS was 5.6 months. Post progression 125 patients (67%) received further chemotherapy, 56 received further Cape monotherapy with a median of 4 additional cycles. Median overall survival for all patients is 14.3 months. Median survival was significantly higher for baseline ECOG 0 vs. ≥ 1 and normal vs. elevated LDH. When comparing patients receiving 2000 compared to 1500 mg/m2 the ORR was 19% vs. 17%, and the DCR was 73% vs. 63%. Median PFS was 5.9 vs. 4.7 months, and the OS was equal at 14.3 months. Hand-foot syndrome was more common at the higher dose, 46% vs. 30%, any grade. Conclusions: This report suggests dose reduced Cape has less toxicity compared to full dose, with only a small tradeoff in efficacy seen as a lower ORR. However, its improved tolerability likely leads to an increased number of cycles of therapy, and the PFS seems consistently higher at the lower dose. This trial reduces uncertainty regarding further dose reductions to 1500 mg/m2 for frail patients, in whom quality of life may be paramount. This should be viewed as compelling evidence, in the absence of a head to head clinical trial, that 2000, or even 1500, mg/m2 is an appropriate dose in elderly or frail patients with aCRC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".