MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Biopsy Confirmation of Metastatic Disease in Breast Cancer: Results from a Large Prospective Study.

2009· article· en· W2084629943 on OpenAlexaff
Eitan Amir, OC Freedman, C. Simmons, Naomi Miller, William R. Geddie, George Dranitsaris, Hla M. Maung, J. Napolskikh, Michelle Lax, M. Clemons

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBiopsyMetastatic breast cancerProgesterone receptorMalignancyBreast cancerConcordanceInternal medicineCancerProspective cohort studyEstrogen receptorOncologyHormone receptorPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Decisions about systemic treatment of women with metastatic breast cancer are often based on estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PgR), and HER2/neu status of the primary tumour. This study prospectively investigated concordance in receptor status between primary tumour and distant metastases at various stages of progression and assessed the impact of any discordance on patient management.Methods: Biopsies of suspected metastatic lesions were obtained from patients and analyzed for ER/PgR and HER2/neu. Receptor status of metastases was compared to the primary tumour. The treating physician completed questionnaires before and after biopsy to determine whether the biopsy result lead to a change in treatment plan.Results: One hundred and sixteen women were enrolled and 102 underwent biopsy. Of these 52 (51%) were newly diagnosed with metastatic disease, 17 (17%) had received one line of metastatic treatment and 35 (34%) had received 2 or more lines of treatment in the metastatic setting. 86/102 (84%) of samples were sufficient analysis; of these 5/86 biopsies (6%) showed benign disease and one biopsy (1%) confirmed a different malignancy (indolent lymphoma). Changes in hormone receptor status were observed in 33%. Among these, ER discordance was seen in 11%, PgR discordance in 27% and discordance in both ER and PgR in 5%. Loss of PgR was the most common change in hormone receptor status (25%). HER2/neu showed 4% discordance. Three patients (3%) gained and one patient (1%) lost HER2/neu expression. Biopsy results led to a change of management in 12% of patients. Patients with newly diagnosed metastatic disease were more likely to show discordance than those previously treated in the metastatic setting. Among triple negative primary tumours, no changes in receptor expression of metastases were seen.Conclusions: This is the largest prospective biopsy study we are aware of. Results demonstrate the presence of substantial discordance in receptor status between primary tumour and metastases. The number needed to biopsy to alter immediate management was 8.5, although biopsy information could also be useful in planning subsequent treatments. Tissue confirmation should therefore, be considered in all patients with suspicion of metastatic recurrence or progression. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2023.

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)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→