Randomized Trial of Tamoxifen Versus Combined Tamoxifen and Octreotide LAR Therapy in the Adjuvant Treatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women: NCIC CTG MA.14
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Somatostatin analogs act directly on breast cancer cells and indirectly on insulin and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels. This trial was undertaken to assess whether octreotide would lower insulin and IGF-1 levels and reduce risk of breast cancer recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The NCIC CTG MA.14 (NCIC Clinical Trials Group MA.14) trial randomly assigned postmenopausal women to 5 years of tamoxifen 20 mg daily (TAM) or TAM plus 2 years of octreotide 90 mg depot intramuscular injections monthly (TAM-OCT) as adjuvant therapy. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS). Secondary end points were relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, and effects of treatment on IGF physiology. RESULTS: Among 667 women with a median follow-up of 7.9 years, 220 events occurred-108 with TAM-OCT and 112 with TAM. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs; TAM-OCT to TAM) were 0.93 for EFS (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.22; P = .62), 0.84 for RFS (95% CI, 0.59 to 1.18; P = .31), and 0.97 for OS (95% CI, 0.69 to 1.37; P = .86). Among patients with normal baseline gallbladder imaging, cholecystectomy was required in 23.0% of those receiving TAM-OCT but in only 1.4% of those receiving TAM (P < .001). At 4 months, TAM-OCT had significantly (P < .001) lowered IGF-1, IGF binding protein 3, and C-peptide levels. Older age (P = .02), tumor size (P = .001), nodal status (P = .01), high C-peptide levels (P < .001), and higher body mass index (BMI) in models excluding C-peptide (P < .001) were associated with poorer EFS in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Octreotide-related changes in circulating IGF-1 and C-peptide levels were statistically significant. Octreotide did not add significant clinical benefit. High C-peptide levels (surrogate for insulin secretion rate) and high BMI were associated with poor outcome.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".