MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023152696 · doi:10.1586/14737140.6.10.1355

Refining the postmenopausal breast cancer treatment paradigm: the FACE trial

2006· review· en· W2023152696 on OpenAlex
Alain Monnier

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Anticancer Therapy · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnastrozoleMedicineLetrozoleBreast cancerTamoxifenOncologyInternal medicineAromatase inhibitorAromataseClinical trialRandomized controlled trialAdjuvantGynecologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is clear that letrozole and anastrozole provide significant benefits for patients with breast cancer. However, possible differences in efficacy have been suggested by varying degrees of aromatase inhibition and effectiveness in the neoadjuvant and first-line settings. Analyses of aromatase inhibitor-treated patient subgroups within the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination trial and Breast International Group 1-98 trial, and the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group's MA.17 study, have also suggested some differences in efficacy. The question is how best to maximize these differences to benefit specific patient subgroups, such as postmenopausal women with node-positive disease. Nodal status is one of the strongest prognostic factors for breast cancer recurrence and several studies have shown that patients with node-positive disease are at higher risk for early relapse. It is thought that patients at increased risk for early relapse may be better treated with an aromatase inhibitor upfront, but the guidelines are unclear as to which aromatase inhibitor should be used. To answer this important question quickly, the Femara Anastrozole Clinical Evaluation (FACE) trial is recruiting node-positive patients and randomizing them to receive either early adjuvant letrozole or early adjuvant anastrozole. The trial has been designed to differentiate between the two drugs in the shortest possible time frame by using patients at increased risk of early recurrence of breast cancer, so that the required number of events to initiate analysis will be obtained more quickly. In total, 4000 patients who have recently undergone surgery for node-positive primary breast cancer (and who have no clinical or radiological evidence of recurrent disease or metastasis) are being enrolled around the world. The FACE trial will not only provide an efficacy evaluation between these two aromatase inhibitors but also provide a valuable head-to-head comparison of the safety profiles of adjuvant letrozole and anastrozole. The data will be transferred to an independent academic organization, the Istituto Nazionale Tumori (Michelangelo Foundation, Milan, Italy), which will verify and analyze the data, removing any perception of bias. An Independent Data Monitoring Committee will then decide when and how the trial data are to be released. The results are expected to further refine the treatment paradigm for breast cancer in postmenopausal patients with node-positive disease.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.349 · 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