MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Low-dose metronomic topotecan and pazopanib in children with recurrent or refractory solid tumors: A C17 Canadian phase I trial (TOPAZ).

2021· article· en· W3167303800 on OpenAlexaffabout
Arif Manji, Daniel A. Morgenstern, Yvan Samson, Rebecca Deyell, Donna L. Johnston, Victor Lewis, Alexandra P. Zorzi, Jason N. Berman, Kathy Brodeur‐Robb, Ellen Morrison, Sylvain Baruchel, James A. Whitlock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioLondon Health Sciences CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineC17 CouncilUniversity of TorontoBC Children's HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersNovartis
KeywordsMedicinePazopanibNeutropeniaInternal medicineRhabdomyosarcomaTopotecanAdverse effectPharmacokineticsCmaxFebrile neutropeniaGastroenterologyOncologySarcomaSurgeryToxicityChemotherapyCancerSunitinibPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10020 Background: Low-dose metronomic topotecan (mTP) represents a novel approach to chemotherapy delivery which, in preclinical models, may work synergistically with pazopanib (PZ) in targeting angiogenesis. This study was designed to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of mTP/PZ in pediatric patients with solid tumors, while describing the safety and toxicity of this regimen. Methods: A phase I dose-escalation, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) study of mTP/PZ was conducted at ten sites across Canada, enrolling pediatric patients aged 2-21 years with relapsed/refractory solid tumors. Patients were treated with oral mTP and PZ suspension daily without interruption in 28-day cycles, with dose escalation in accordance with the rolling-six design. Five dose levels (0.12/125, 0.16/125, 0.22/125, 0.22/160, and 0.3/160 mg/m2/day of mTP/PZ) were evaluated. PK studies were performed on day 1 and at steady state, and PD studies included circulating angiogenic factors VEGFR1, VEGFR2, VEGF, endoglin and placental growth factor. Results: Thirty patients (pts) were enrolled, of whom 26 were evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), with median age 12 years (3-20). The most common diagnoses included osteosarcoma (8), neuroblastoma (NB, 7), Ewing sarcoma/PNET (4), and rhabdomyosarcoma (4). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) related to protocol therapy were neutropenia (18%), thrombocytopenia (11%), lymphocytopenia (11%), AST elevation (11%), and lipase elevation (11%). Only 2 cycle-1 DLTs were observed on study, both at the 0.3/160 mg/m2 mTP/PZ dose level (2/5 pts) comprising persistent grade 3 thrombocytopenia and grade 3 ALT elevation. No AEs experienced beyond cycle-1 required treatment discontinuation. Best response was stable disease in 10/25 pts (40%) for a median duration of 6.4 months (1.7-45.1). One patient with refractory NB achieved stable disease for 45 months and continued on mTP/PZ via compassionate access after study closure. PK and PD results are pending at this time. Conclusions: The combination of oral mTP and PZ is safe and tolerable in pediatric patients with solid tumors, with a RP2D of mTP 0.22 mg/m2/day and PZ suspension 160 mg/m2/day. Ten patients achieved stable disease for a median of 6 months. The lack of objective responses suggests that this combination is likely of limited benefit for relapsed disease, but may play a role as maintenance therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02303028.

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)0.000
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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207