MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158770026 · doi:10.1200/jco.2014.55.4139

Past, Present, and Future Challenges in Breast Cancer Treatment

2014· article· en· W2158770026 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteGenentechAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCancerOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The past half century—the lifetime of the American Society of Clinical Oncology—represents a historical watershed in the management of breast cancer, a period in which old dogmas were overthrown, to be replaced by biology-driven therapeutic approaches. These approaches transformed the disease from one where mutilating local therapy was followed by distant recurrence and death, to one where patients regularly choose local (and often minimal) therapy, then receive systemic therapies that are increasingly effective and progressively more targeted. Breast cancer, perhaps more than any other solid tumor, was transformed by the progressive application of clinical hypothesis testing of basic biologic concepts. The revolutionary overthrow of the Halstedian hypothesis, with its emphasis on the primacy of locoregional control through extensive surgery, led to changes both in locoregional therapy as well as providing the intellectual basis for adjuvant systemic therapies. And, at a time when systemic therapies were dominated by rank empiricism, breast cancer led the way in the application of targeted biologic therapy, long before targeted therapy became an oncologic mantra. This article will review a half-century of progress, focusing on the areas in which the greatest progress has been seen: the revolution in locoregional therapy; the application of cytotoxic chemotherapy in both local and advanced disease; the discovery and therapeutic exploitation of estrogen receptor biology; the use of estrogen receptor biology for breast cancer prevention; and the targeting of the human epidermal growth factor receptor complex. Collectively, these constitute a revolution in breast cancer therapeutics that has occurred within the lifetime of an organization. Finally, we will touch on the remaining therapeutic challenges for this disease. Locoregional Therapy The locoregional treatment of breast cancer has been transformed through changes in both the biologic understanding and the clinical presentation of the disease. Starting with the pivotal randomized clinical trials from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) and the Milan group, radical mastectomy was replaced by modified radical mastectomy and eventually breastconserving surgery, with breast radiation becoming the preferred

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.343 · 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