MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089122543 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0081740

RSF1 and Not Cyclin D1 Gene Amplification May Predict Lack of Benefit from Adjuvant Tamoxifen in High-Risk Pre-Menopausal Women in the MA.12 Randomized Clinical Trial

2013· article· en· W2089122543 on OpenAlexafffund
Dana Keilty, Marguerite Buchanan, Katerina Ntapolias, Olga Aleynikova, Dongsheng Tu, Xiao Li, Lois E. Shepherd, Vivien Bramwell, Mark Basik

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Research Institute
KeywordsTamoxifenBreast cancerOncologyMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioEstrogen receptorPredictive markerCyclin D1BiomarkerProportional hazards modelCancerBiologyCell cycleConfidence intervalGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most women with estrogen receptor expressing breast cancers receiving anti-estrogens such as tamoxifen may not need or benefit from them. Besides the estrogen receptor, there are no predictive biomarkers to help select breast cancer patients for tamoxifen treatment. CCND1 (cyclin D1) gene amplification is a putative candidate tamoxifen predictive biomarker. The RSF1 (remodeling and spacing factor 1) gene is frequently co-amplified with CCND1 on chromosome 11q. We validated the predictive value of these biomarkers in the MA.12 randomized study of adjuvant tamoxifen vs. placebo in high-risk premenopausal early breast cancer. Premenopausal women with node-positive/high-risk node-negative early breast cancer received standard adjuvant chemotherapy and then were randomized to tamoxifen (20 mg/day) or placebo for 5 yrs. Overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were evaluated. Fluorescent in-situ hybridization was performed on a tissue microarray of 495 breast tumors (74% of patients) to measure CCND1 and RSF1 copy number. A multivariate Cox model to obtain hazard ratios (HR) adjusting for clinico-pathologic factors was used to assess the effect of these biomarkers on Os and RFS. 672 women were followed for a median of 8.4 years. We were able to measure the DNA copy number of CCND1 in 442 patients and RSF1 in 413 patients. CCND1 gene amplification was observed in 8.7% and RSF1 in 6.8% of these patients, preferentially in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. No statistically significant interaction with treatment was observed for either CCND1 or RSF1 amplification, although patients with high RSF1 copy number did not show benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen (HR = 1.11, interaction p = 0.09). Unlike CCND1 amplification, RSF1 amplification may predict for outcome in high-risk premenopausal breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen.

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)0.003
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 score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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