Abstract P4-12-11: Patient preference for subcutaneous trastuzumab via handheld syringe versus intravenous infusion in HER2-positive early breast cancer: Cohort 2 of the PrefHer study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background In the HannaH study (NCT00950300), a 600 mg fixed dose of subcutaneous (SC) trastuzumab, administered via handheld syringe, was shown to have noninferior efficacy and comparable pharmacokinetic and safety profiles to the intravenous (IV) formulation for the (neo)adjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer. Cohort 1 of the ongoing, randomized, multicenter, international, crossover PrefHer study (NCT01401166) showed that an overwhelming 92% of patients preferred SC trastuzumab via single-use injection device to conventional IV administration. The objective of the current analysis was to assess patient preferences for SC or IV trastuzumab in Cohort 2 of PrefHer, an independently assessed cohort in which SC trastuzumab was administered via handheld syringe. Methods After completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, patients were randomized to receive 4 cycles of SC trastuzumab (fixed dose of 600 mg) followed by 4 cycles of IV trastuzumab (8 mg/kg→6 mg/kg) or the reverse sequence (the crossover period) as part of their adjuvant trastuzumab therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients indicating an overall preference for SC versus IV trastuzumab, assessed using a two-sided test against the null hypothesis of 65% preference for SC. Prior to randomization and again at the end of the crossover period, experienced interviewers conducted telephone interviews with patients. Information on factors potentially influencing preferences, including type of venous access device used and experiences during administration, was collected. After the crossover period, patients’ final preferences were elicited, along with reasons for these and the strength of them. Interviews were stringently quality-controlled to ensure impartial questioning. Four researchers independently coded from verbatim quotes the two primary reasons patients gave for their preferences. These were reconciled and grouped into ten categories for descriptive analyses. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed by standard methods. Results Two hundred and forty patients were enrolled: 231 received SC and IV trastuzumab and completed both patient interviews, and 239 received ≥1 dose of study drug. Baseline demographics/characteristics/treatment histories were generally balanced. SC trastuzumab was preferred by 199/231 patients (86%, 95% CI 81–90%; p<0.0001); 29 preferred IV (13%, 95% CI 9–18%), and 3 had no preference (1%, 95% CI 0–4%). Of the patients who preferred SC, overall preferences were “very strong” in 144/199 (72%), “fairly strong” in 36 (18%), and “not very strong” in 19 (10%). The two primary categories for SC preference were: i) time saving and ii) less pain/discomfort. AEs were reported in 77% of patients during the crossover period (69% mild, 36% moderate, 8% severe, 0% life-threatening/fatal, 1% serious). Overall safety was comparable with the known IV profile in early breast cancer. Summary As with Cohort 1, patients in Cohort 2 of the PrefHer study overwhelmingly preferred SC over IV trastuzumab delivery. The 4 cycles of SC trastuzumab and 4 of IV were well tolerated. SC trastuzumab is therefore an important option in the treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P4-12-11.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».