A phase I study of sorafenib with FOLFIRI as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Safety and efficacy results.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3633 Background: Phase I dose escalation to a maximum planned dose (MPD) o determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended-phase-II-dose (RP2D) and preliminary efficacy of sorafenib and FOLFIRI (irinotecan reduced-dose) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Methods: Starting doses: irinotecan 80 mg/m2 iv d1, sorafenib 400 mg po twice daily (bid, continuous), starting day 2. Escalations based on toxicity observed at the previous dose level (DL) up to: irinotecan 100 mg/m2 and sorafenib 800 mg bid. DLT was evaluated within the 1st study cycle (1 cycle = 2 FOLFIRI treatments). Results: 5 cohorts were concluded. All 16 ECOG PS 0-1 patients (9/7 men/women; 2/14 rectal/colon) with median age of 64, discontinued study: 10 (62%) disease progression, 4 (25%) toxicity, 1 curative surgery, 1 comorbidities. The dose levels of irinotecan (mg/m2, day1) and sorafenib (mg/day, bid, day 2-28) studied were DL1-80/400, DL2-80/600, DL3-90/600, DL4-100/600 and DL5-100/800, repeated every 4 weeks, 3 patients/DL. No DLT was observed. The MTD was not reached at the MPD (DL5). The most common ≥Gr2 treatment related adverse events (AEs) were: neutropenia 81%, HFS 69%, leucopenia 50%, fatigue 38%, anemia 31%, constipation 31%, nausea/vomiting 31%, mucositis 31%, diarrhea 25%, hypophosphatemia 25%. The most severe treatment related AEs were: Gr4: neutropenia 2 (12.5%); pulmonary embolism 1 (6%); Gr3: HFS 9 (56%), neutropenia 3 (19%), leucopenia 3 (19%), hypophosphatemia 3 (19%). Objective response rate was 56% (9 of 16 patients, 95%CI; 33-77%). Response duration was 13 months (95%CI; 5-17). Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 11 months (95%CI; 6-17) and 25 months (95%CI; 15-34), respectively. Conclusions: Combination therapy with S and modified FOLFIRI in these patients is well tolerated and demonstrates clinical efficacy at the MPD. The MTD was not reached at the MPD. Future research of this combination is warranted. Supported by Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals. Clinical trial information: NCT00780169.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".