Metastatic Behavior of Breast Cancer Subtypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Prognostic and predictive factors are well established in early-stage breast cancer, but less is known about which metastatic sites will be affected. METHODS: Patients with early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between 1986 and 1992 with archival tissue were included. Subtypes were defined as luminal A, luminal B, luminal/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), HER2 enriched, basal-like, and triple negative (TN) nonbasal. Distant sites were classified as brain, liver, lung, bone, distant nodal, pleural/peritoneal, and other. Cumulative incidence curves were estimated for each site according to competing risks methods. Association between the site of relapse and subtype was assessed in multivariate models using logistic regression. RESULTS: Median follow-up time among 3,726 eligible patients was 14.8 years. Median durations of survival with distant metastasis were 2.2 (luminal A), 1.6 (luminal B), 1.3 (luminal/HER2), 0.7 (HER2 enriched), and 0.5 years (basal-like; P < .001). Bone was the most common metastatic site in all subtypes except basal-like tumors. In multivariate analysis, compared with luminal A tumors, luminal/HER2 and HER2-enriched tumors were associated with a significantly higher rate of brain, liver, and lung metastases. Basal-like tumors had a higher rate of brain, lung, and distant nodal metastases but a significantly lower rate of liver and bone metastases. TN nonbasal tumors demonstrated a similar pattern but were not associated with fewer liver metastases. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer subtypes are associated with distinct patterns of metastatic spread with notable differences in survival after relapse.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".