MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040757096 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs-09-13

Outcomes of Women Who Were Premenopausal at Diagnosis of Early Stage Breast Cancer in the NCIC CTG MA17 Trial.

2009· article· en· W2040757096 on OpenAlexaff
Paul E. Goss, James N. Ingle, Silvana Martino, Nicholas J. Robert, H. B. Muss, Lois E. Shepherd, Kathleen I. Pritchard, Robert B. Livingston, Nancy E. Davidson, Edith A. Perez, David Cameron, Timothy J. Whelan, Michael Palmer, Dongsheng Tu

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLetrozoleMedicineTamoxifenBreast cancerHazard ratioRandomizationInternal medicineAromatase inhibitorGynecologyOncologyProportional hazards modelAnastrozoleCancerMastectomyRandomized controlled trialConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: MA17 showed that adjuvant letrozole after 5 years of tamoxifen markedly reduced the risk of recurrence in women with ER+ early stage breast cancer and improved overall survival in women presenting with node +ve disease. Most trials of early adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy required women to be postmenopausal at diagnosis to be eligible. We report here on a subset of women in the MA17 trial who were premenopausal at initial diagnosis and in whom subsequent menopause, prior to randomization, may have influenced their outcome on extended adjuvant letrozole.Methods: Women randomized to MA17 were divided into 2 groups: 1) pre-menopausal (< 50 years of age but underwent bilateral oophorectomy at time when tamoxifen treatment started or < 50 years of age at the start of tamoxifen treatment but became amenorrheic during adjuvant chemotherapy or tamoxifen treatment) and 2) post-menopausal. Disease-free survival (DFS) from time of randomization for women in these two groups were summarized by Kaplan-Meier curves and compared based on log-rank test and Cox model.Results: 889 women were identified as premenopausal and 4,277 as postmenopausal. Treatment, age, race, duration of tamoxifen, prior adjuvant chemotherapy, and mastectomy were independently associated with menopausal status on multivariate analysis. The interaction between treatment and menopausal status was statistically significant for DFS (p=0.02), indicating that women diagnosed with pre-menopausal breast cancer had significantly greater benefit (Hazard ratio=0.25, 95% CI: 0.12-0.51) with letrozole treatment in terms of DFS than those with post-menopausal status (hazard ratio=0.69 with 95% CI from 0.52 to 0.91). In comparison with women treated with placebo, pre-menopausal women on letrozole had a significantly higher incidence of arthralgia (24 vs. 16%; p=0.004) but a lower incidence of vaginal bleeding (10 vs. 16%; p=0.01). Compared with placebo post-menopausal women receiving letrozole had a higher incidence of hot flashes/flashes (55 vs. 50%; p=0.001), arthralgia (25 vs. 21%; p=0.002), myalgia (15 vs. 12%; p=0.007) and alopecia (5 vs. 3%; p=0.003).Conclusions: Letrozole after tamoxifen was more effective in improving DFS in women who were premenopausal at primary diagnosis than those who were postmenopausal. Letrozole was well tolerated in premenopausal women. These data indicate that women who are premenopausal at the time of diagnosis but become postmenopausal anytime before, or during, adjuvant tamoxifen should be considered for extended adjuvant therapy with letrozole. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations32
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicEstrogen and related hormone effectsFrench-language works237,207