Supportive therapies in patients with advanced adrenocortical carcinoma submitted to standard EDP-M regimen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The management of patients with advanced/metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is challenging, EDP-M (etoposide, doxorubicin, cisplatin combined with mitotane) is the standard regimen. However, it is quite toxic, so an adequate supportive therapy is crucial to reduce as much as possible the side effects and maintain the dose intensity of cytotoxic agents. METHODS: We describe the main side effects of the EDP-M scheme and the best way to manage them based on the experience of the Medical Oncology Unit of the Spedali Civili of Brescia. We also deal with the administration of EDP-M in specific frail patients, such as those with huge disease extent and poor performance status (PS) and those with mild renal insufficiency. RESULTS: In patients with hormone secreting ACC the rapid control of Cushing syndrome using adrenal steroidogenesis inhibitors such as metyrapone or osilodrostat is mandatory before starting EDP-M. Primary prophylaxis of neutropenia with Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factors is crucial and should be introduced at the first chemotherapy cycle. Possible mitotane induced hypoadrenalism should be always considered in case of persistent nausea and vomiting and asthenia in the interval between one cycle to another. In case of poor PS. A 24 h continuous infusion schedule of cisplatin could be an initial option in patients with poor PS as well as to reduce the risk of nefrotoxocity in patients with mild renal impairment. CONCLUSION: A careful and accurate supportive care is essential to mitigate EDP-M side effects as much as possible and avoid that, due to toxicity, patients have to reduce doses and or postpone cytotoxic treatment with a negative impact on efficacy of this chemotherapy regimen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".