Prevention Strategies with Aromatase Inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aromatase (estrogen synthetase) inhibitors are superior to tamoxifen in terms of both efficacy and toxicity in the treatment of advanced breast cancer and also in the neoadjuvant setting. Recent results from the Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination adjuvant trial showed a marked reduction in contralateral primary breast cancer with anastrozole, an apparent prevention effect. A similar effect was seen in the MA.17 adjuvant trial comparing letrozole with placebo after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen. This has accelerated interest in aromatase inhibitors as primary preventive therapy. Two studies being conducted by the National Cancer Institute of Canada's Clinical Trials Group select women by virtue of mammographic breast density. The International Breast Cancer Intervention Study 2 trial randomizes women at elevated risk to anastrozole or placebo. Because of its steroidal structure, exemestane may be more effective than the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors and may protect bone and lipid metabolism from the effects of estrogen ablation. Elevated prostaglandin E2 levels from cyclooxygenase-2 induction by preinvasive and invasive breast lesions increase a number of tumor-promoting pathways, including aromatase, as well as angiogenetic, antiapoptotic, and others. Additive or synergistic effects between celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, and exemestane have been demonstrated and have led to the National Cancer Institute of Canada's Clinical Trials Group MAP.3 trial, which will randomize women at elevated risk to placebo or to exemestane with or without celecoxib. The efficacy and long-term toxicity data from the aromatase inhibitor prevention trials, and the identification of risk profiles from trial results, are awaited with interest.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".