P4-11-13: Influence of Two Years of Exemestane on Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women at Increased Risk of Developing Breast Cancer; a Companion Study to the NCIC CTG MAP.3 Trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Exemestane significantly reduced invasive and preinvasive breast cancers in postmenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer in the NCIC CTG MAP3 trial with no serious toxicities, including excess fractures or osteoporosis. Purpose: To provide additional information on the effect of exemestane on bone loss in women at high risk for breast cancer, within a subset of women participating on the NCIC CTG MAP.3B study. The primary hypothesis is that exemestane does not induce clinically significant bone loss in postmenopausal women at increased risk of developing breast cancer at 2 years. The primary objective of this companion study is to examine the effect of exemestane on lumbar spine and total hip BMD by DEXA at 2 years in women participating in the MAP3 trial. Methods: The MAP.3B bone sub-study registered women from the main MAP. 3 trial from May 2008 to March 2010. Eligible women had to have an acceptable quality BMD scan by DEXA taken within 12 months prior to randomization to MAP.3. A BMD T-score >-2.0 SD (i.e. better than 2 standard deviations below the average peak BMD of a young adult woman) was established as the study population cutoff. A questionnaire including information on height, falls, fractures, lifestyle information including physical activity, tobacco and alcohol use was completed at baseline, 12 months, 24 months and at last visit. Fasting serum for bone biomarkers was collected at 12 months and total hip and L1-L4 (postero-anterior) spine BMD were measured 2 years after randomization on the same Lunar or Hologic scanner. The primary objective was to determine differences in hip and spine BMD at 2 years. Secondary outcomes include number of skeletal fractures and development of osteoporosis 2 years after randomization and changes in bone biomarkers at 1 year after randomization. For the analysis of the primary endpoints, the upper limit of a one sided 95% confidence interval for the difference in mean percentage changes between placebo and exemestane will be calculated for the BMD by DEXA at each site. We will conclude that exemestane does not induce significant bone loss in postmenopausal women at increased risk of developing breast cancer at 2 years when the upper limit is less than 3% for both sites. Similar confidence interval approach will be used to analyze the secondary endpoints. Results: Between May 2008 and March 2010, 238 postmenopausal women were recruited. Median age was 61.8 years, and the majority of women were Caucasian (91%), with approximately 20% of the participants reporting a recent fall (within past 12 months) and another 13% reporting a recent fracture prior to randomization. We will report results from the primary as well as the secondary endpoints at the SABCS meeting. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2011;71(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-11-13.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".