<i>HER2</i> and Responsiveness of Breast Cancer to Adjuvant Chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amplification of the human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2, also called HER2/neu) gene and overexpression of its product in breast-cancer cells may be associated with responsiveness to anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens. METHODS: In the randomized, controlled Mammary.5 trial, we studied 639 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens obtained from 710 premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer who had received either cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil (CMF) as adjuvant chemotherapy. HER2 amplification or overexpression was evaluated with the use of fluorescence in situ hybridization, immunohistochemical analysis, and polymerase-chain-reaction analysis. RESULTS: Amplification of HER2 was associated with a poor prognosis regardless of the type of treatment. In patients whose tumors showed amplification of HER2, CEF was superior to CMF when assessed on the basis of relapse-free survival (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.34 to 0.80; P=0.003) and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.42 to 1.02; P=0.06). For women whose tumors lacked amplification of HER2, CEF did not improve relapse-free survival (hazard ratio for relapse, 0.91; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.71 to 1.18; P=0.49) or overall survival (hazard ratio for death, 1.06; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.44; P=0.68). The adjusted hazard ratio for the interaction between treatment and HER2 amplification was 1.96 for relapse-free survival (95 percent confidence interval, 1.15 to 3.36; P=0.01) and 2.04 for overall survival (95 percent confidence interval, 1.14 to 3.65; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Amplification of HER2 in breast-cancer cells is associated with clinical responsiveness to anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. (cancer.gov number, NCI-V90-0027.).
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".