Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26946136›Full record

Trial reportClinical pharmacokinetics2016

Revisiting Dosing Regimen Using Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Mathematical Modeling: Densification and Intensification of Combination Cancer Therapy.

Christophe Meille, Dominique Barbolosi, Joseph Ciccolini, Gilles Freyer, Athanassios Iliadis

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IClinical Trial, Phase II
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Treatment of evolving cancers will require dynamic decision support.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2023
    Review
  4. Mechanistic models for hematological toxicities: Small is beautiful.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Christophe MeillePharmacokinetics Unit, Faculty of Pharmacy, Aix Marseille University, SMARTc, Inserm CRO2 UMR_S 911, 27, bd. Jean Moulin, CS 30064, 13385, Marseille, France.
Dominique BarbolosiPharmacokinetics Unit, Faculty of Pharmacy, Aix Marseille University, SMARTc, Inserm CRO2 UMR_S 911, 27, bd. Jean Moulin, CS 30064, 13385, Marseille, France.
Joseph CiccoliniPharmacokinetics Unit, Faculty of Pharmacy, Aix Marseille University, SMARTc, Inserm CRO2 UMR_S 911, 27, bd. Jean Moulin, CS 30064, 13385, Marseille, France.
Gilles FreyerEMR3738, Ciblage Thérapeutique en Oncologie, Faculté de Médecine et de Maïeutique Lyon-Sud Charles Mérieux, Université Claude Bernard, Oullins, France.
Athanassios IliadisPharmacokinetics Unit, Faculty of Pharmacy, Aix Marseille University, SMARTc, Inserm CRO2 UMR_S 911, 27, bd. Jean Moulin, CS 30064, 13385, Marseille, France. athanassios.iliadis@univ-amu.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Controlling effects of drugs administered in combination is particularly challenging with a densified regimen because of life-threatening hematological toxicities. We have developed a mathematical model to optimize drug dosing regimens and to redesign the dose intensification-dose escalation process, using densified cycles of combined anticancer drugs. A generic mathematical model was developed to describe the main components of the real process, including pharmacokinetics, safety and efficacy pharmacodynamics, and non-hematological toxicity risk. This model allowed for computing the distribution of the total drug amount of each drug in combination, for each escalation dose level, in order to minimize the average tumor mass for each cycle. This was achieved while complying with absolute neutrophil count clinical constraints and without exceeding a fixed risk of non-hematological dose-limiting toxicity. The innovative part of this work was the development of densifying and intensifying designs in a unified procedure. This model enabled us to determine the appropriate regimen in a pilot phase I/II study in metastatic breast patients for a 2-week-cycle treatment of docetaxel plus epirubicin doublet, and to propose a new dose-ranging process. In addition to the present application, this method can be further used to achieve optimization of any combination therapy, thus improving the efficacy versus toxicity balance of such a regimen.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBreast NeoplasmsCombined Modality TherapyDocetaxelDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleEpirubicinFemaleGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHumansInfusions, IntravenousModels, TheoreticalNeoplasm MetastasisTaxoidsDocetaxelEpirubicinGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorTaxoids

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.