MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143681410 · doi:10.1038/bjc.2011.516

Beyond trastuzumab: novel therapeutic strategies in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

2012· review· en· W2143681410 on OpenAlexafffund
Roger Y. Tsang, Richard S. Finn

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersTerry Fox FoundationBoehringer Ingelheim
KeywordsTrastuzumabLapatinibMedicineMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerOncologyInternal medicineBevacizumabAdjuvantCancerCancer researchChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) alteration present in 25 to 30% of breast cancers, has been associated with improved survival outcomes in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings. However, despite the robust clinical efficacy of trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC), primary and secondary resistance remains a clinical challenge. Although lapatinib has demonstrated modest activity in this setting, trials reported to date have yet to demonstrate improvements in overall survival with its use. Novel therapeutic strategies to circumvent trastuzumab resistance are warranted, and agents targeting the HER, vascular endothelial growth factor, heat shock protein 90, phosphoinositide 3 kinase/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin, and insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor pathways represent rational approaches in the management of HER2-positive disease. In this review, early-phase and emerging trial data surrounding the use of these promising agents in HER2-positive MBC will be discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations91
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207