MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099380770 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djp067

Topoisomerase II Alpha and Responsiveness of Breast Cancer to Adjuvant Chemotherapy

2009· article· en· W2099380770 on OpenAlexaffabout
F P O’Malley, Stephen Chia, Dongsheng Tu, Lois E. Shepherd, Mark N. Levine, V. Bramwell, Irene L. Andrulis, Kathleen I. Pritchard

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaSunnybrook Health Science CentreLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalFoothills Medical CentreBC Cancer AgencyOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpirubicinHazard ratioInternal medicineCyclophosphamideAnthracyclineBreast cancerFluorouracilMedicineOncologyChemotherapyCancerProportional hazards modelConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Amplification or deletion of the topoisomerase II alpha (TOP2A) gene in breast cancers has been postulated to be more closely associated with responsiveness to anthracycline-containing chemotherapy than amplification of the human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) gene. METHODS: We studied 438 tumors from 710 premenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer who received cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and 5-fluorouracil (CEF) or cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF) as adjuvant chemotherapy in the randomized National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Mammary 5 (MA.5) trial. TOP2A alterations and HER2 amplification were quantified by fluorescence in situ hybridization. The association of TOP2A and HER2 status with recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in the two treatment groups was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, the log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard models. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: In patients whose tumors showed TOP2A alterations (either amplifications or deletions), treatment with CEF was statistically significantly superior to treatment with CMF in terms of RFS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.17 to 0.73, P = .005) and OS (adjusted HR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.75, P = .008). In patients without TOP2A amplification or deletion, the corresponding adjusted hazard ratios for RFS and OS were 0.90 (95% CI = 0.66 to 1.23, P = .49) and 1.09 (95% CI = 0.77 to 1.56, P = .62). Adjusted tests of interaction between treatment and TOP2A status were P = .09 for RFS and P = .02 for OS. Adjusted tests of interaction between treatment and HER2 status were P = .008 for RFS and P = .02 for OS. CONCLUSION: TOP2A gene alterations (amplifications or deletions) are associated with an increase in responsiveness to anthracycline-containing chemotherapy regimens relative to non-anthracycline regimens that is similar to that seen in patients with HER2 amplification.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations194
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207