Outcomes of her2-positive Early-Stage Breast Cancer in the Trastuzumab Era: A Population-Based Study of Canadian Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Breast cancer is heterogenous, with variable expression of the estrogen receptor (er), progesterone receptor (pr), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (her2). Overexpression of her2 is generally considered a negative prognostic feature, but whether outcomes for her2-positive early breast cancer remain different from those for other subtypes in the era of trastuzumab-based adjuvant therapy is unknown. METHODS: Using a retrospective chart review, we compared overall survival (os) and relapse-free survival (rfs) in 3 groups of patients with early-stage breast cancer: er-positive or pr-positive (or both) and her2-negative ["hormone receptor-positive" (hr+)]; her2-positive (her2+); and er-negative, pr-negative, and her2-negative ["triple-negative" (tn)]. RESULTS: In the 503 charts analyzed (332 hr+, 94 her2+, 77 tn), the 5-year os and rfs were, respectively, 94.2% and 87.2% for hr+ patients, 88.6% and 74.9% for her2+ patients, and 85.4% and 76.2% for tn patients. On multivariate analysis, the os for the her2+ subtype was similar to that for the hr+ subtype (hazard ratio:1.07; 95% confidence interval: 0.31 to 3.67 with hr+ as reference), but os was significantly worse for tn patients than for hr+ patients (hazard ratio: 4.37; 95% confidence interval: 1.56 to 12.24). In her2+ patients, the 5-year os and rfs trended better for patients with er+ or pr+ disease than for patients with er-negative and pr-negative disease (5-year os: 92.1% vs. 86.9%; 5-year rfs: 79.8% vs. 71.4%). Of her2+ patients, just 80.9% received trastuzumab, including 33.3% of her2+ patients with sub-centimetre tumours. CONCLUSIONS: In the trastuzumab era, patients with her2+ and hr+ early breast cancer have similar outcomes, while tn patients experience a significantly worse os than either of the foregoing groups. Outcomes for her2+ patients may differ by er and pr status. Trastuzumab was underutilized in this cohort.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".