Abstract GS1-01: Race and clinical outcomes in the RxPONDER Trial (SWOG S1007)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction: Racial disparities in breast cancer (BC) outcomes continues to be a major health care challenge. The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) is an important tool to guide treatment (tx) decisions among women with early-stage BC. We report an analysis of clinical characteristics, survival outcomes and race in association with RS in participants (pts) in the RxPONDER trial. Methods: We analyzed clinical outcomes with respect to race and ethnicity. Unreported race excluded 18.7% of the pts, with most due to privacy rules. The primary outcome was invasive disease-free survival (IDFS). Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) was also evaluated. Analyses adjusted for assigned tx arm, RS, and grade were performed. There were too few events to include Native American/Pacific Islander (NAPI) women in the survival analyses. Results: A total of 4,048 trial women with Hormone Receptor positive, HER2 negative (HR+/HER2-) BC, 1-3 involved axillary lymph nodes (LNs), RS ≤ 25 and known race/ethnicity were included in this analysis including the following: 2,833 non-Hispanic (NH) White pts (70%), 248 NH Black pts (6.1%), 610 Hispanic pts (15.1%), 324 Asian pts (8.0%), and 33 NAPI pts (0.8%). Asian and Hispanic women were younger than NH Whites (by 7.1 and 2.4 years, respectively) but NH Blacks did not differ in age. RS distribution did not differ among all racial subgroups (p=0.49). There were also no significant differences in tumor size (p=0.10) or number of positive LNs (p=0.26) across all racial groups. However, tumor grade was found to be significantly different with grade 3 tumors higher for NH Blacks (18.0%), NH NAPI (21.1%), and Hispanics (14.5%) vs. NH Whites (10.4%) and Asians (6.5%) (p< 0.001). Overall five-year IDFS was lower for NH Blacks (87.0%) compared to that for Asians (93.9%), NH Whites (91.5%), and Hispanics (91.4%) (Table 1). A multivariable Cox model adjusting for RS and tx arm showed worse IDFS for NH Blacks compared to NH Whites (HR=1.38; 95% CI 1.00-1.90; p=0.048), although Asian pts had better IDFS than NH Whites (HR=0.65; 95% CI 0.44-0.97; p=0.034). In a separate analysis by menopausal status the magnitude of the IDFS hazard ratios (HRs) for NH Blacks was similar, although no longer statistically significant (premenopausal HR=1.37; 95% CI 0.69-2.72; postmenopausal HR=1.38; 95% CI 0.96-1.98). While there was no statistically significant interaction between NH Blacks vs. NH Whites and tx arm for either premenopausal (p=0.99) or postmenopausal women (p=0.44), adjusting for RS, the small number of events in the NH Black cohort, particularly in premenopausal women (n = 9 IDFS events), limit power and inference about differences in chemotherapy benefit. Among postmenopausal women, NH Blacks had worse DRFS compared to NH Whites (HR=1.69; 95% CI 1.12-2.53; p=0.01), adjusting for tx and RS. A similar trend was seen among premenopausal women (HR=1.74; 95% CI 0.79-3.82; p=0.17), although not statistically significant. Data on tx adherence over 5 years was not mature, although NH Blacks were more likely to accept tx assignment compared to NH Whites at randomization (93% vs. 86%, p=0.004). Conclusion: Black women with HR+/HER2- BC, 1-3 involved LNs and RS ≤ 25 have worse outcomes compared to White women despite similar RS results. There was no significant interaction between NH Blacks vs. NH Whites and tx arm, although this analysis was limited due to sample size. There remains an important need for novel approaches to improve clinical outcomes particularly for NH Black Women. Table 1. IDFS by Race and Ethnicity. Citation Format: Yara Abdou, William E. Barlow, Julie R. Gralow, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Kathy S. Albain, Daniel F. Hayes, Nancy U. Lin, Edith A. Perez, Lori J. Goldstein, Stephen K. Chia, Sukhbinder Dhesy-Thind, Priya Rastogi, Emilio Alba, Suzette Delaloge, Anne F. Schott, Steven Shak, Priyanka Sharma, Danika L. Lew, Jieling Miao, Joseph M. Unger, Debu Tripathy, Lajos Pusztai, Gabriel N. Hortobagyi, Kevin Kalinsky. Race and clinical outcomes in the RxPONDER Trial (SWOG S1007) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-01.
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 | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 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 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
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.
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 ».