MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P4-12-11: Patient preference for subcutaneous trastuzumab via handheld syringe versus intravenous infusion in HER2-positive early breast cancer: Cohort 2 of the PrefHer study

2013· article· en· W2024823531 on OpenAlexaff
Xavier Pivot, Joseph Gligorov, Volkmar Müller, Sunil Verma, Ann Knoop, Giuseppe Curigliano, Celalettin Camcı, Valerie Jenkins, Nana Scotto, Stuart Osborne, Lesley Fallowfield

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrastuzumabMedicineCohortCrossover studyBreast cancerClinical endpointRandomizationRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineOncologyCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In the HannaH study (NCT00950300), a 600 mg fixed dose of subcutaneous (SC) trastuzumab, administered via handheld syringe, was shown to have noninferior efficacy and comparable pharmacokinetic and safety profiles to the intravenous (IV) formulation for the (neo)adjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer. Cohort 1 of the ongoing, randomized, multicenter, international, crossover PrefHer study (NCT01401166) showed that an overwhelming 92% of patients preferred SC trastuzumab via single-use injection device to conventional IV administration. The objective of the current analysis was to assess patient preferences for SC or IV trastuzumab in Cohort 2 of PrefHer, an independently assessed cohort in which SC trastuzumab was administered via handheld syringe. Methods After completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy, patients were randomized to receive 4 cycles of SC trastuzumab (fixed dose of 600 mg) followed by 4 cycles of IV trastuzumab (8 mg/kg→6 mg/kg) or the reverse sequence (the crossover period) as part of their adjuvant trastuzumab therapy. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients indicating an overall preference for SC versus IV trastuzumab, assessed using a two-sided test against the null hypothesis of 65% preference for SC. Prior to randomization and again at the end of the crossover period, experienced interviewers conducted telephone interviews with patients. Information on factors potentially influencing preferences, including type of venous access device used and experiences during administration, was collected. After the crossover period, patients’ final preferences were elicited, along with reasons for these and the strength of them. Interviews were stringently quality-controlled to ensure impartial questioning. Four researchers independently coded from verbatim quotes the two primary reasons patients gave for their preferences. These were reconciled and grouped into ten categories for descriptive analyses. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed by standard methods. Results Two hundred and forty patients were enrolled: 231 received SC and IV trastuzumab and completed both patient interviews, and 239 received ≥1 dose of study drug. Baseline demographics/characteristics/treatment histories were generally balanced. SC trastuzumab was preferred by 199/231 patients (86%, 95% CI 81–90%; p<0.0001); 29 preferred IV (13%, 95% CI 9–18%), and 3 had no preference (1%, 95% CI 0–4%). Of the patients who preferred SC, overall preferences were “very strong” in 144/199 (72%), “fairly strong” in 36 (18%), and “not very strong” in 19 (10%). The two primary categories for SC preference were: i) time saving and ii) less pain/discomfort. AEs were reported in 77% of patients during the crossover period (69% mild, 36% moderate, 8% severe, 0% life-threatening/fatal, 1% serious). Overall safety was comparable with the known IV profile in early breast cancer. Summary As with Cohort 1, patients in Cohort 2 of the PrefHer study overwhelmingly preferred SC over IV trastuzumab delivery. The 4 cycles of SC trastuzumab and 4 of IV were well tolerated. SC trastuzumab is therefore an important option in the treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P4-12-11.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207