Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22929884›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2012

Dose banding as an alternative to body surface area-based dosing of chemotherapeutic agents.

E Chatelut, M L White-Koning, R Hj Mathijssen, F Puisset, S D Baker, A Sparreboom

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. An improvement of body surface area formulas using the 3D scanning technique.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. 'The same old story': thoughts on authorized doses of anticancer drugs.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2020
    Article
  14. Optimization of resources by drug management: A multicentred web-administered study on the use of ipilimumab in Italy.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2019
    Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

E ChatelutEA 4553 Institut Claudius-Regaud, Université de Toulouse, 20-24 rue du Pont St Pierre, 31052 Toulouse Cedex, France. chatelut.etienne@claudiusregaud.fr
M L White-Koning
R Hj Mathijssen
F Puisset
S D Baker
A Sparreboom

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDose banding is a recently suggested dosing method that uses predefined ranges (bands) of body surface area (BSA) to calculate each patient's dose by using a single BSA-value per band. Thus, drugs with sufficient long-term stability can be prepared in advance. The main advantages of dose banding are to reduce patient waiting time and improve pharmacy capacity planning; additional benefits include reduced medication errors, reduced drug wastage, and prospective quality control. This study compares dose banding with individual BSA dosing and fixed dose according to pharmacokinetic criteria.

methodsThree BSA bands were defined: BSA<1.7 m(2), 1.7 m(2)≤ BSA<1.9 m(2), BSA ≥ 1.9 m(2) and each patient dose was calculated based on a unique BSA-value per band (1.55, 1.80, and 2.05 m(2), respectively). By using individual clearance values of six drugs (cisplatin, docetaxel, paclitaxel, doxorubicin, irinotecan, and topotecan) from 1012 adult cancer patients in total, the AUCs corresponding to three dosing methods (BSA dosing, dose banding, and fixed dose) were compared with a target AUC for each drug.

resultsFor all six drugs, the per cent variation in individual dose obtained with dose banding compared with BSA dosing ranged between -14% and +22%, and distribution of AUC values was very similar with both dosing methods. In terms of reaching the target AUC, there was no significant difference in precision between dose banding and BSA dosing, except for paclitaxel (32.0% vs 30.7%, respectively; P<0.05). However, precision was significantly better for BSA dosing compared with fixed dose for four out of six drugs.

conclusionFor the studied drugs, implementation of dose banding should be considered as it entails no significant increase in interindividual plasma exposure.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsArea Under CurveBody Surface AreaDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID22929884
PMCPMC3461153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.