MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906348647 · doi:10.1002/cpdd.643

Effect of Rifampicin on the Pharmacokinetics of a Single Dose of Vemurafenib in Patients With <i>BRAF</i> <sup>V600</sup> Mutation–Positive Metastatic Malignancy

2018· article· en· W2906348647 on OpenAlexaff
Weijiang Zhang, Christine McIntyre, Harper Forbes, Rabab Gaafar, Hanaa M Kohail, J. Thaddeus Beck, Stjepko Pleština, E. Bertrán, Todd Riehl

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology in Drug Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMelanoma and MAPK Pathways
Canadian institutionsRoche (Canada)
FundersF. Hoffmann-La Roche
KeywordsVemurafenibMedicinePharmacokineticsPharmacologyArea under the curveDosingRifampicinConfidence intervalInternal medicineGastroenterologyUrologyMetastatic melanomaCancerPathologyTuberculosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Vemurafenib prolongs survival in patients with BRAF V600 ‐mutated advanced melanoma. In vitro studies show cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 is involved in vemurafenib metabolism, but the effect of strong inducers or inhibitors of CYP3A4 on vemurafenib exposure in vivo is unknown. This phase 1, open‐label, multicenter study evaluated the effect of rifampicin, a CYP3A4 inducer, on the pharmacokinetics of single‐dose vemurafenib in 27 patients with BRAF V600 mutation–positive metastatic malignancy. Patients received a single oral dose of vemurafenib 960 mg on day 1, oral rifampicin 600 mg daily on days 8–16 (period B), and a single oral dose of vemurafenib 960 mg on day 17 and rifampicin 600 mg daily for days 17–23 (period C), with plasma samples obtained up to 168 hours after vemurafenib dosing. The geometric mean ratio (period C/period A) of area under the concentration‐time curve from time zero to last measurable concentration time point and area under the concentration‐time curve from time zero to infinity for vemurafenib (n = 23 for the pharmacokinetic analysis) was 0.61 (90% confidence interval, 0.48–0.78) and 0.60 (90% confidence interval, 0.47–0.76), respectively, indicating rifampicin significantly decreased vemurafenib plasma exposure by approximately 40%. The geometric mean ratio of the maximum concentration for vemurafenib was 1.1; this slight increase is likely owing to one outlier in period C. Adverse events were consistent with those previously seen for rifampicin and for vemurafenib monotherapy. Caution is advised when dosing vemurafenib concurrently with CYP3A4 inducers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology in Drug DevelopmentSame topicMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysFrench-language works237,207