Neoadjuvant therapy with cisplatin in BRCA1-positive breast cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is administered to control disease, make surgical resection possible and increase the possibility of breast tissue conservation. A further advantage of neoadjuvant therapy is that it helps to assess chemo-sensitivity to a particular agent. Induction of a pathological complete response (pCR) is one of the primary goals of neoadjuvant therapy in order to achieve a better disease-free and overall survival. Experimental data suggest that BRCA1 related breast cancer may have increased sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy, but clinical data are limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of complete pathologic response after neo-adjuvant treatment with cisplatin chemotherapy in women with breast cancer and a BRCA1 mutation. Twenty five women with breast cancer and a BRCA1 mutation with stage I, II, and III breast cancer between December 2006 and July 2009 were entered into this study. Patients were treated with cisplatin 75 mg/m intravenously every three weeks for four cycles. After chemotherapy, patients underwent surgery and were assessed for pathologic response in both the breast and axillary lymph nodes. Complete pathologic response was defined as no residual invasive disease in both the breast and axilla, however ductal carcinoma in situ was allowed. Thirty eight patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty three patients had tumors of greater than two centimeters (60%) and eleven patients had positive lymph nodes at diagnosis (29%). Thirty five patients completed four cycles of cisplatin (92%) and three patients completed two cycles (8%). Clinical complete response was observed in twenty eight patients (74%). Pathologic complete response was observed in twenty three (60,5%). Platinum-based chemotherapy is effective in a high proportion of patients with BRCA1-associated breast cancers. Clinical trials are warranted to determine the optimum treatment for this subgroup of breast cancer patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".