MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P3-12-01: Impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) and menstrual history (MH) in the NSABP B-36: A randomized phase III trial comparing six cycles of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) to four cycles of adriamycin and cyclophosphamide

2015· article· en· W1642111304 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia A. Ganz, John Wilson, Hanna Bandos, André Robidoux, Alexander Paterson, Johnathan Polikoff, Luis Báez-Díaz, Adam Brufsky, Louis Fehrenbacher, Aroop Mangalik, Patrick J. Ward, Louise Provencher, John Hamm, Philip J. Stella, Robert L. Carolla, Richard G. Margolese, Henry R. Shibata, Edith A. Perez, Norman Wolmark

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Internal medicineClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialSurgeryGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background NSABP B-36 compares 6 cycles of FEC-100 with 4 cycles of standard AC in pts with node-negative breast cancer. As reported separately, no significant differences between the two treatment arms were observed in the primary endpoint of disease-free survival or in the secondary endpoints of overall survival, recurrence-free, or distant recurrence-free intervals. Greater toxicity was reported in pts who received FEC compared to AC. We present here the results of the QOL and MH studies obtained prospectively in conjunction with the treatment study. We hypothesized that pts on FEC would experience greater treatment toxicity in the first 12 months of the study, and would have greater rates of amenorrhea at 18 months compared to pts on AC. Methods Among the 1,357 pts enrolled in the QOL study, 1,332 (675 AC, 657 FEC) submitted the baseline form and had QOL follow-up (fup) information. Pts completed: 1) the FACT-B instrument; 2) a symptom checklist; and 3) the SF-36 Vitality Scale, all at baseline, day 1 of cycle 4, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months after random assignment. FACT-B Trial Outcome Index (TOI), symptom severity, and vitality scores were compared between the two treatment arms using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis with adjustment for the baseline scores, type of surgery, and hormone receptor status, examining the first 12 months and the later time points separately. Menstrual status was collected at baseline for all enrolled pts, with subsequent assessments on day 1 of cycle 4, and at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 months for pts with menstrual bleeding within 12 months prior to random assignment and not having had a hysterectomy and/or bilateral oophorectomy (1, 096 pts). Post-chemotherapy amenorrhea was defined as the lack of menstrual periods during the 12 months preceding the 18-month fup evaluation. Data from 921 pts (475 AC, 446 FEC) were available for analysis. Logistic regression, adjusted for type of surgery and hormone receptor status, was used to test for association of amenorrhea status and treatment. Results Both TOI and vitality scores were worse for pts on FEC compared to those on AC at 6 months (p<0.01) with no significant difference at 12 months and beyond. No significant differences in symptom severity between the two treatment arms were observed. The rates of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea were significantly different between FEC and AC (66.8% vs. 58.7%, p=0.01) with positive hormone receptor status as an independent risk factor (p=0.03). Conclusions Women receiving FEC had diminished QOL at 6 months after random assignment, but no difference at 12 months or later. Premenopausal women receiving FEC experienced a higher rate of post-chemotherapy amenorrhea than women receiving AC. Support NCI grants U10-CA-12027, -37377, -69974, -69651 and -44066-26, and Pharmacia & Upjohn Company, a subsidiary of Pfizer, Inc. Citation Format: Patricia A Ganz, John W Wilson, Hanna Bandos, André Robidoux, Alexander HG Paterson, Johnathan Polikoff, Luis Baez-Diaz, Adam M Brufsky, Louis Fehrenbacher, Aroop Mangalik, Patrick J Ward, Louise Provencher, John T Hamm, Philip J Stella, Robert L Carolla, Richard G Margolese, Henry R Shibata, Edith A Perez, Norman Wolmark. Impact of treatment on quality of life (QOL) and menstrual history (MH) in the NSABP B-36: A randomized phase III trial comparing six cycles of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), epirubicin, and cyclophosphamide (FEC) to four cycles of adriamycin and cyclophosphamide [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-12-01.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicMultiple and Secondary Primary CancersFrench-language works237,207