Health-Related Quality of Life With Adjuvant Docetaxel- and Trastuzumab-Based Regimens in Patients with Node-Positive and High-Risk Node-Negative, HER2-Positive Early Breast Cancer: Results from the BCIRG 006 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to describe and compare health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with node-positive and high-risk node-negative HER2-positive early breast cancer receiving adjuvant docetaxel and trastuzumab-based or docetaxel-based regimens alone. METHODS: Eligible patients (n = 3,222) were randomly assigned to either four cycles of adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by four cycles of docetaxel (AC→T) or one of two trastuzumab-containing regimens: adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel plus trastuzumab administered for 1 year (AC→TH) or six cycles of docetaxel plus carboplatin combined with trastuzumab administered for 1 year (TCH). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and BR-23 were administered at baseline, the start of cycle 4 (mid), and the end of chemotherapy (EOC), as well as at 6, 12, and 24 months after chemotherapy. RESULTS: Compliance rates for the EORTC questionnaires were acceptable at 72%-93% of eligible patients out to the 12-month assessment. Systemic side effect (SE) change scores were significantly improved for TCH-treated patients compared with AC→TH and AC→T at EOC, suggesting improved tolerability. Physical functioning (PF) was only slightly worse at midpoint for those receiving TCH, compared with patients who were just starting on taxane in an AC→TH regimen, but was otherwise similar between arms. All treatment arms recovered from the deterioration in SE, PF, and Global Health Scale scores by 1 year and median future perspective change scores continued to improve throughout treatment and follow-up. CONCLUSION: HRQL outcomes for adjuvant docetaxel and trastuzumab-based regimens are favorable and support TCH as a more tolerable treatment option.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".