MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2164130095 · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.22.6449

Topoisomerase IIα Amplification and Anthracycline-Based Chemotherapy: The Jury Is Still Out

2009· editorial· en· W2164130095 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Francisco J. Esteva, Gabriel N. Hortobágyi

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineAnthracyclineTopoisomeraseChemotherapyCancer researchJuryOncologyInternal medicinePharmacologyCancerDNAGeneticsBreast cancerBiologyLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Adjuvant anthracycline-based chemotherapy has been shown to improve disease-free survival (DFS) rates and overall survival (OS) rates in women with early-stage breast cancer, irrespective of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status. Retrospective studies using banked tumor samples from randomized clinical trials revealed a correlation between HER2 overexpression and benefit from anthracyclines. The largest of these randomized trials were the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-11 and the National Cancer Institute of Canada (NCIC) MA.5 studies. The Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 8541 trial showed a significant improvement in DFS and OS rates for women with HER2positive tumors who received doxorubicin at 60 mg/m every 4 weeks (in combination with fluorouracil and cyclophosphamide), which is the current standard dose of doxorubicin. This dose and schedule were more effective than lower doses of the same combination in the HER2-positive subset. Interestingly, NSABP B-11 showed a correlation between HER2 overexpression and improved DFS rate despite using a significantly lower dose of doxorubicin (30 mg/m every 3 weeks). In contrast, Bartlett et al did not find a correlation between HER2 status and increased anthracycline activity in a randomized trial of cyclophoshamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) compared to cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF). The concept that HER2-positive tumors are more sensitive to anthracycline-based chemotherapy is interesting. However, preclinical studies do not support a direct role for HER2 in this setting. Pegram et al tested the sensitivity of a panel of cell lines engineered to overexpress HER2 to doxorubicin and compared them to the parental, nontransfected cell lines. In this preclinical study, HER2 overexpression did not confer increased sensitivity to doxorubicin. So, is HER2 a surrogate marker for increased response to anthracyclines or not? Recently, attention has been turned to topoisomerase II (topo II ) as a predictor of response to anthracyclines because its function is inhibited by these agents. The topo II gene is localized on the long arm of chromosome 17, and its proximity to HER2 generated significant interest. Harris et al hypothesized that the increased benefit seen with anthracycline-based chemotherapy in patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who participated in CALGB 8541 was due to topo II amplification. In their correlative science study, the HER2 gene was amplified in 19% of tumors; the topo II gene was amplified in 7% of tumors and deleted in 11% of cases. As expected, there was a strong positive correlation between HER2 and topo II amplification. However, topo II amplification did not predict DFS in patients with HER2-positive tumors. One of the main limitations of this study was the lack of a control group treated with non–anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. The role of topo II as a predictor of response to anthracyclines in the adjuvant setting has been studied in multiple retrospective studies. The NCIC Clinical Trials Group MA.5 trial randomly assigned patients with node-positive breast cancer to CEF or to CMF. In this study, patients with HER2-positive tumors experienced a longer DFS rate if treated with CEF. Topo II amplification or deletion correlated with HER2 positivity and with improved DFS rates in patients treated with CEF. While several publications seem to point in the direction that topo II predicts for anthracycline activity, closer inspection reveals substantial heterogeneity of data. Different assays have been used by different authors: some looked at gene copy number, some at amplification, some at gene deletion, and some at protein expression, so it is unclear which of these various approaches should be used to select therapy. For example, in a randomized trial led by the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group, HER2 expression was not predictive of response to CEF or CMF but topo II amplification or deletion correlated with an improved DFS rate in patients treated with CEF. Furthermore, while gene amplification would fit the hypothesis that increased presence of the target would predict increased benefit from a drug that targets topo II , the association of gene deletion with increased activity is harder to explain biologically. Moreover, with other targets, increased concentration actually predicts reduced activity of the drug (methotrexate, as an example). The predictive role of topo II must be placed in perspective of modern adjuvant systemic therapy. If it is true that HER2-positive tumors are more likely to respond to anthracycline-based chemotherapy, should we exclude anthracyclines from well-established trastuzumab-based regimens? Most patients with HER2-positive tumors are currently considered for trastuzumab-based adjuvant chemotherapy. Because doxorubicin and trastuzumab are both potentially cardiotoxic, a test that could predict benefit from anthracyclines would be clinically useful. The Breast Cancer International Research Group trial 006 randomly assigned more than 3,000 patients with HER2 gene–amplified breast cancer to doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel compared with the same regimen plus trastuzumab or a nonanthracycline regimen consisting of docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab. In this study, both trastuzumab-containing regimens resulted in superior DFS rates compared with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel. Cardiac toxicity was lower in the docetaxel, carboplatin, and trastuzumab group than in the group JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY E D I T O R I A L VOLUME 27 NUMBER 21 JULY 2

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,012
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,012
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,063

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0120,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0040,006
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,009
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,160
Tête enseignante GPT0,565
Écart entre enseignants0,404 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations15
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Clinical OncologyMême sujetHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchTravaux en français237 207