↓ Skip to main content

The Effect of Hepatic Impairment on Outcomes in Phase I Clinical Trials in Cancer Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Cancer Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Effect of Hepatic Impairment on Outcomes in Phase I Clinical Trials in Cancer Subjects
Published in
Clinical Cancer Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-16-0449
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aaron S. Mansfield, on behalf of the NCI Organ Dysfunction Working Group, Michelle A. Rudek, Diana Vulih, Gary L. Smith, Pamela Jo Harris, S. Percy Ivy

Abstract

Purpose The NCI Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program sponsors hepatic dysfunction phase 1 clinical trials (HDCT) and phase 1 clinical trials (P1CT) to determine safe doses and schedules of antineoplastic therapeutics. We sought to compare clinical outcomes between these trial types while stratifying by hepatotoxic agents. Experimental design Individual subject data were extracted from the records of 51 NCI-sponsored HDCT and P1CT. The NCI's Organ Dysfunction Working Group's hepatic impairment categorization and two drug-induced liver injury (DILI) scales (FDA R ratio and Hy's law) were used to classify subjects. The number of cycles administered and treatment discontinuation reason were also evaluated and compared between groups. Results There were 513 and 1328 subjects treated on HDCT (n=9) and P1CT (n=42), respectively. There were differing patterns of DILI with significant worsening of total bilirubin in subjects on HDCT, and worsening of ALT in subjects on P1CT. Cholestatic peak patterns of liver impairment (predominant increases in alkaline phosphatase rather than transaminases) were more frequent in HDCT. Criteria for Hy's Law were met by 11 subjects on P1CT but not by any subjects on HDCT. Disease progression was the most common reason for treatment discontinuation, followed by adverse events at similar frequencies in both HDCT and P1CT. Conclusions The differential effects on hepatotoxicity suggest that underlying hepatic function may affect susceptibility to and patterns of DILI. The incorporation of additional measures of hepatic function may help identify those at highest risk of hepatotoxicity in future trials since baseline liver tests did not.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 21%
Researcher 5 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 11 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,850,641
of 22,870,727 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Cancer Research
#10,210
of 12,605 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,147
of 307,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Cancer Research
#129
of 179 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,870,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,605 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,483 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 179 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.