Dose calculation of anticancer drugs
Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism and Toxicology, ISSN: 1742-5255, Vol: 4, Issue: 10, Page: 1307-1319
2008
- 33Citations
- 59Captures
- 3Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations33
- Citation Indexes33
- 33
- CrossRef28
- Captures59
- Readers59
- 59
- Mentions3
- References3
- Wikipedia3
Review Description
Background: Anticancer drugs are characterized by a narrow therapeutic window and significant inter-patient variability in therapeutic and toxic effects. Current body surface area (BSA)-based dosing fails to standardize systemic anticancer drug exposure and other alternative dosing strategies also have their limitations. Just as important as the initial dose selection is the subsequent dose revision to ensure the dose is correct. Objective: To provide an insight into the different dose individualization and dose adjustment methods, their feasibility and applicability in daily oncology practice and to suggest a practical framework for dose calculation and a basis for future research. Methods: Review of relevant literature related to dose calculation of anticancer drugs. Results: Strategies using clinical parameters, genotype and phenotype markers, and therapeutic drug monitoring all have potential and each has a role for specific drugs. However, no one method is a practical dose calculation strategy for many or all drugs. Conclusion: Given that BSA-dosing leads to significant underclosing it is not reasonable to use this as the sole method of dose calculation. Because of wide disparity in individual patient characteristics and elimination mechanisms, we are unlikely to find the 'Holy Grail' of a single individualized dosing strategy for every patient and anticancer drug in the near future. We propose a pragmatic, although invalidated system for initial dose calculation using dose clusters and structured subsequent dose revision based on treatment-related toxicities and therapeutic drug monitoring. These models need to be tested in clinical trials. © 2008 Informa UK Ltd.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know