MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postmenopausal Women with DCIS Post-Mastectomy: A Potential Role for Aromatase Inhibitors

2012· review· en· W1504318646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rowan T. Chlebowski, Nananda F. Col

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Breast Journal · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExemestaneMedicineLetrozoleAnastrozoleBreast cancerTamoxifenAromataseOncologyMastectomyAromatase inhibitorInternal medicineCancerGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) where optimal local control or patient preference results in mastectomy, despite substantial risk of contralateral invasive breast cancer, tamoxifen is uncommonly prescribed based on unfavorable risk-benefit consideration. In the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trial Group (NCIC CTG) MAP.3 primary prevention trial, in postmenopausal women exemestane reduced invasive breast cancer incidence by 65% without increasing life-threatening side effects. In adjuvant breast cancer trials, the aromatase inhibitor exemestane as well as anastrozole and letrozole have all reduced new contralateral breast cancer incidence. Thus, aromatase inhibitors, and perhaps particularly exemestane, provide an option to address the risk of contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with DCIS managed with mastectomy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Breast JournalSame topicEstrogen and related hormone effectsFrench-language works237,207