MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995692008 · doi:10.1002/cncr.21872

Comparison of anastrozole versus tamoxifen as preoperative therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor‐positive breast cancer

2006· article· en· W1995692008 on OpenAlexaff
Luigi Cataliotti, Aman U. Buzdar, Shinzaburo Noguchi, José Bines, Yuichi Takatsuka, Katarína Petráková, Pierre Dubé, Célia Tosello Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnastrozoleMedicineTamoxifenAntiestrogenBreast cancerMastectomyHormonal therapyOncologyCancerInternal medicineUrologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Pre-Operative "Arimidex" Compared to Tamoxifen (PROACT) study was a randomized, multicenter study comparing anastrozole with tamoxifen as a preoperative treatment of postmenopausal women with large, operable (T2/3, N0-2, M0), or potentially operable (T4b, N0-2, M0) breast cancer. The effect of preoperative endocrine therapy in patients scheduled for mastectomy or with inoperable tumors at baseline was also investigated. METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer received anastrozole (n = 228) or tamoxifen (n = 223) with or without chemotherapy for 12 weeks before primary surgery. RESULTS: Objective responses for anastrozole and tamoxifen occurred in 39.5% and 35.4% of patients, respectively (ultrasound measurements), and 50.0% and 46.2% of patients, respectively (caliper measurements). In hormonal therapy-only patients (n = 314), feasible surgery at baseline improved after 3 months in 43.0% of patients receiving anastrozole and 30.8% receiving tamoxifen (P = .04). In the intent-to-treat population, improvement in feasible surgery at baseline to actual surgery at 3 months was found to be numerically higher in the anastrozole group compared with the tamoxifen group, although this difference did not reach significance. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 20.2% and 18.1% of patients, respectively, in the anastrozole and tamoxifen groups. CONCLUSIONS: Anastrozole is an effective and well-tolerated preoperative therapy, producing clinically beneficial tumor downstaging and reductions in tumor volume. These effects enable more minimal surgical interventions in patients scheduled for mastectomy, and mastectomy in patients with previously inoperable tumors. Anastrozole appears to be at least as effective as tamoxifen in this setting, and more effective than tamoxifen in certain clinically relevant subgroups. Cancer 2006. (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations353
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207