MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404373322 · doi:10.3390/curroncol31110527

Population Pharmacokinetics of Tamibarotene in Pediatric and Young Adult Patients with Recurrent or Refractory Solid Tumors

2024· article· en· W4404373322 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Takuya Azechi, Yutaka Fukaya, Chika Nitani, Junichi Hara, Hiroshi Kawamoto, Tomoaki Taguchi, Kenichi Yoshimura, Akihiro Sato, Naoko Hattori, Toshikazu Ushijima, Toshimi Kimura

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsMedicineRefractory (planetary science)PharmacokineticsPopulation pharmacokineticsPediatricsPopulationInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tamibarotene is a synthetic retinoid that inhibits tumor cell proliferation and promotes differentiation. We previously reported on the safety and tolerability of tamibarotene in patients with recurrent or refractory solid tumors. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic properties of tamibarotene and construct a precise pharmacokinetic model. We also conducted a non-compartmental analysis and population pharmacokinetic (popPK) analysis based on the results of a phase I study. Targeted pediatric and young adult patients with recurrent or refractory solid tumors were administered tamibarotene at doses of 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 g/m2/day. Serum tamibarotene concentrations were evaluated after administration, and a popPK model was constructed for tamibarotene using Phoenix NLME. During model construction, we considered the influence of various parameters (weight, height, body surface area, and age) as covariates. Notably, 22 participants were included in this study, and 109 samples were analyzed. A two-compartment model incorporating lag time was selected as the base model. In the final model, the body surface area was included as a covariate for apparent total body clearance, the central compartment volume of distribution, and the peripheral compartment volume of distribution. Visual prediction checks and bootstrap analysis confirmed the validity and predictive accuracy of the final model as satisfactory.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207