MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

NCIC-CTG MA.20: An intergroup trial of regional nodal irradiation in early breast cancer.

2011· article· en· W1783107099 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy J. Whelan, Ivo A. Olivotto, Ida Ackerman, Judy‐Anne W. Chapman, Boon Chua, Abdenour Nabid, Katherine A. Vallis, Julia White, Pierre Rousseau, A. Fortin, L.J. Pierce, L. Manchul, Peter Craighead, Marc Nolan, Joseph Bowen, David R. McCready, K.I. Pritchard, Mark N. Levine, Wendy R. Parulekar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerMastectomyRadiation therapyInternal medicineOncologyAdjuvantPopulationInterim analysisCancerSurgeryRandomized controlled trialGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

LBA1003 Background: Randomized trials have demonstrated that locoregional radiation after mastectomy reduces locoregional recurrence and improves overall survival (OS) in women with node positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant systemic therapy. MA.20 evaluated the addition of regional nodal irradiation (RNI) to whole breast irradiation (WBI) following breast conserving surgery (BCS). Methods: Women with high risk node-negative or node-positive breast cancer treated with BCS and adjuvant chemotherapy and/or endocrine therapy were stratified by positive nodes, axillary nodes removed, chemo- and endocrine therapy and randomized to WBI (50Gy in 25 fractions +/- boost irradiation) or WBI plus RNI (45Gy in 25 fractions) to the internal mammary, supraclavicular, and high axillary lymph nodes. The primary outcome was OS. The Data Safety Monitoring Committee approved the analysis plan for the protocol specified interim analysis of relapse patterns, survival and toxicity at 5 years. Upon review of the data, they recommended release of the results. Results: Between March 2000 to March 2007, 1,832 women were randomly assigned to WBI+RNI (916) or WBI (916). Median follow-up was 62 months. Characteristics of the study population were: mean age, 53.3 years; node negative, 10%; 1-3 positive nodes, 85%; > 4 positive nodes, 5%; adjuvant chemotherapy, 91%; and adjuvant endocrine therapy, 71%. WBI+RNI in comparison to WBI alone was associated with an improvement in isolated locoregional disease free survival (DFS; HR=.59, p=.02, 5 year risk: 96.8% and 94.5% respectively), distant DFS (HR=.64, p=.002, 5 year risk: 92.4% and 87.0% respectively), DFS (HR=.68, p=.003, 5 year risk: 89.7% and 84.0% respectively) and OS (HR=.76, p=.07, 5 year risk: 92.3% and 90.7% respectively). WBI+RNI in comparison to WBI was associated with an increase in grade 2 or greater pneumonitis (1.3% and 0.2% respectively, p=.01), and lymphedema (7.3% and 4.1% respectively, p=.004). Conclusions: The majority of women with node positive breast cancer are now managed by BCS followed by WBI and adjuvant systemic therapy. Results from MA.20 demonstrate that additional RNI reduces the risk of locoregional and distant recurrence, and improves DFS with a trend in improved OS.

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)0.001
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 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

Citations241
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207