MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165819904 · doi:10.1002/cncr.22867

The impact of new chemotherapeutic and hormone agents on survival in a population‐based cohort of women with metastatic breast cancer

2007· article· en· W2165819904 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

VenueCancer · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
FundersSanofiPfizerAmgen
KeywordsMedicineCohortMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerInternal medicineProportional hazards modelPopulationOncologyCancerCohort studySurvival analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, a number of new therapeutic agents have become available in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). This study characterized the use and assessed the impact on survival of population-based access to new agents for the treatment of MBC. METHODS: The dates of release in British Columbia of 7 new systemic agents for MBC during the 1990s were used to construct 4 time cohorts. All patients with a first diagnosis of distant metastases in each of the time cohorts were identified and characterized, and their survival was compared. Cox proportional regression modeling was used to assess for predictors of survival. RESULTS: In total, 2150 patients with a first distant metastases diagnosed during 1 of the 4 cohort intervals were identified. Baseline characteristics between cohorts were similar, except a greater proportion of the later cohorts received adjuvant chemotherapy (P < .001), had positive estrogen receptor status (P = .01), and had a longer median time from initial diagnosis to MBC (P < .001). Survival in Cohort 1 (1991-1992) and Cohort 2 (1994-1995; median, 438 days and 450 days, respectively) was similar. Survival was longer in Cohort 3 (1997-1998; median, 564 days; P = .002) and improved further in Cohort 4 (1999-2001; median, 667 days; P = .05). In multivariate analysis, the later cohorts were associated independently with improved survival (P = .01 and P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Population-based access to new therapeutic agents for MBC appeared to be associated with improved survival. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to date that demonstrates, from a population-based perspective, improving survival over the past decade for women with MBC.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.348 · 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