MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P5-13-09: Feasibility of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Vitamin D vs. Placebo in Recently Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients

2010· article· en· W2028598713 on OpenAlexaffabout
DW Cescon, PA Ganz, S Hallak, Marguerite Ennis, BK Mills, PJ Goodwin

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerRandomized controlled trialPopulationPlaceboInternal medicineCohortCancerVitamin D and neurologyvitamin D deficiencyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Vitamin D (Vit D) supplementation is an area of interest in the primary and secondary prevention of many cancers. We previously reported a high prevalence of Vit D insufficiency and deficiency in newly diagnosed breast cancer (BC) patients. Low Vit D levels were associated with poor BC outcomes. Here we evaluate the state of Vit D adequacy and supplementation in a more recently diagnosed cohort of BC patients from 2 large urban centres, and we examine the feasibility of a placebo-controlled randomized trial (RCT) of supplementation in this population. Patients and Methods: Women diagnosed with T1-3, N0-3, M0 invasive BC within the previous 2 years were prospectively identified from institutional registries and recruited from Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto and UCLA, Los Angeles (LA), between March 2009 and January 2010. Anthropometric measurements were performed, and dietary, lifestyle and medication histories were obtained using structured questionnaires and interviews. Tumor and treatment characteristics were obtained from clinical records; blood samples were collected for analysis of Vit D levels. The pre-specified feasibility criteria for a Vit D (vs placebo) RCT were: ≥30% of patients with (i) deficient or insufficient Vit D levels, (ii) taking ≥1000 IU Vit D/day and (iii) willing to participate in such a trial. Results: 173 eligible patients were enrolled (80 Toronto, 93 LA). Median age at enrollment was 57 years; 73.4% were post-menopausal. Median tumor size (1.8 cm), lymph node involvement (39%), ER (80%), PR (65%) and Her2 (15%) positivity were similar between centres. Treatment characteristics including rates of mastectomy (44%), adjuvant chemotherapy (56%), radiation (68%), hormonal therapy (69%) and trastuzumab (14%) did not differ between centres. 84.4% of women reported use of Vit D containing supplements, with median daily doses of 1200 IU (Toronto) and 1400 IU (LA) (p=0.3) among users. Respective median 25-OH Vit D levels were 85.5 nmol/L (34.3 ng/mL) and 98.5 nmol/L (39.5 ng/mL) (p=0.04), and rates of deficiency, insufficiency and adequacy were 3.8%, 23.8%, 72.5% (Toronto) and 4.3%, 20.7%, 75.0% (LA) (p=0.88). No Vit D levels were in the toxic range. 25-OH Vit D levels correlated with Vit D supplement use (r=0.41, P<0.0001). 68% of women expressed willingness to participate in a Vit D RCT; however, only 12.7% of the study population met the pre-specified feasibility criteria. Conclusions: Vit D levels and supplementation rates are substantially higher in these BC patients than in previous cohorts, though more than 25% of women do not have adequate levels. Rates of adequacy did not differ between patients recruited in Toronto and LA. While the maj ority of women would be willing to participate in an RCT of Vit D supplementation, low levels of deficiency/insufficiency and high rates of supplement use may limit the feasibility of such a study. Funded by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-13-09.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207