MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082326948 · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000279

Subtyping of Breast Cancer by Immunohistochemistry to Investigate a Relationship between Subtype and Short and Long Term Survival: A Collaborative Analysis of Data for 10,159 Cases from 12 Studies

2010· review· en· W2082326948 on OpenAlexafffund
Fiona M. Blows, Kristy Driver, Marjanka K. Schmidt, Annegien Broeks, Flora E. van Leeuwen, Jelle Wesseling, Maggie C.U. Cheang, Karen A. Gelmon, Torsten O. Nielsen, Carl Blomqvist, Päivi Heikkilä, Tuomas Heikkinen, Heli Nevanlinna, Lars A. Akslen, Louis R. Bégin, William D. Foulkes, Fergus J. Couch, Xianshu Wang, Vicky Cafourek, Janet E. Olson, Laura Baglietto, Graham G. Giles, Gianluca Severi, Catriona McLean, Melissa C. Southey, Emad A. Rakha, Andrew R. Green, Ian O. Ellis, Mark E. Sherman, Jolanta Lissowska, William F. Anderson, Angela Cox, Simon S. Cross, Malcolm Reed, Elena Provenzano, Sarah‐Jane Dawson, Alison M. Dunning, Manjeet K. Humphreys, Douglas F. Easton, Montserrat García‐Closas, Carlos Caldas, Paul D.P. Pharoah, David G. Huntsman

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Medicine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCancer Council VictoriaNational Cancer InstituteKWF KankerbestrijdingJewish General HospitalNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCanadian Breast Cancer Research AllianceBreast Cancer CampaignHelsingin ja Uudenmaan SairaanhoitopiiriNIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research CentreSanofiMayo ClinicU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesNational Institutes of HealthNational Health and Medical Research CouncilCancer Research UK
KeywordsBreast cancerImmunohistochemistrySubtypingCytokeratinOncologyInternal medicineHormone receptorProgesterone receptorCancerBasal (medicine)BiologyEpidermal growth factor receptorPathologyMedicineEstrogen receptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Immunohistochemical markers are often used to classify breast cancer into subtypes that are biologically distinct and behave differently. The aim of this study was to estimate mortality for patients with the major subtypes of breast cancer as classified using five immunohistochemical markers, to investigate patterns of mortality over time, and to test for heterogeneity by subtype. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We pooled data from more than 10,000 cases of invasive breast cancer from 12 studies that had collected information on hormone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status, and at least one basal marker (cytokeratin [CK]5/6 or epidermal growth factor receptor [EGFR]) together with survival time data. Tumours were classified as luminal and nonluminal tumours according to hormone receptor expression. These two groups were further subdivided according to expression of HER2, and finally, the luminal and nonluminal HER2-negative tumours were categorised according to expression of basal markers. Changes in mortality rates over time differed by subtype. In women with luminal HER2-negative subtypes, mortality rates were constant over time, whereas mortality rates associated with the luminal HER2-positive and nonluminal subtypes tended to peak within 5 y of diagnosis and then decline over time. In the first 5 y after diagnosis the nonluminal tumours were associated with a poorer prognosis, but over longer follow-up times the prognosis was poorer in the luminal subtypes, with the worst prognosis at 15 y being in the luminal HER2-positive tumours. Basal marker expression distinguished the HER2-negative luminal and nonluminal tumours into different subtypes. These patterns were independent of any systemic adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The six subtypes of breast cancer defined by expression of five markers show distinct behaviours with important differences in short term and long term prognosis. Application of these markers in the clinical setting could have the potential to improve the targeting of adjuvant chemotherapy to those most likely to benefit. The different patterns of mortality over time also suggest important biological differences between the subtypes that may result in differences in response to specific therapies, and that stratification of breast cancers by clinically relevant subtypes in clinical trials is urgently required.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.006
Bibliometrics0.0220.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1,150
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS MedicineSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207