MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Defining Breast Cancer Intrinsic Subtypes by Quantitative Receptor Expression

2015· article· en· W2168507982 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

VenueThe Oncologist · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcMaster UniversitySunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer InstituteFederación Española de Enfermedades RarasCancer Research UKBreast Cancer Research Foundation
KeywordsBreast cancerExpression (computer science)CancerCancer researchComputational biologyBiologyOncologyMedicineGeneticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To determine intrinsic breast cancer subtypes represented within categories defined by quantitative hormone receptor (HR) and HER2 expression. METHODS: We merged 1,557 cases from three randomized phase III trials into a single data set. These breast tumors were centrally reviewed in each trial for quantitative ER, PR, and HER2 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) stain and by reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), with intrinsic subtyping by research-based PAM50 RT-qPCR assay. RESULTS: Among 283 HER2-negative tumors with <1% HR expression by IHC, 207 (73%) were basal-like; other subtypes, particularly HER2-enriched (48, 17%), were present. Among the 1,298 HER2-negative tumors, borderline HR (1%-9% staining) was uncommon (n = 39), and these tumors were heterogeneous: 17 (44%) luminal A/B, 12 (31%) HER2-enriched, and only 7 (18%) basal-like. Including them in the definition of triple-negative breast cancer significantly diminished enrichment for basal-like cancer (p < .05). Among 106 HER2-positive tumors with <1% HR expression by IHC, the HER2-enriched subtype was the most frequent (87, 82%), whereas among 127 HER2-positive tumors with strong HR (>10%) expression, only 69 (54%) were HER2-enriched and 55 (43%) were luminal (39 luminal B, 16 luminal A). Quantitative HR expression by RT-qPCR gave similar results. Regardless of methodology, basal-like cases seldom expressed ER/ESR1 or PR/PGR and were associated with the lowest expression level of HER2/ERBB2 relative to other subtypes. CONCLUSION: Significant discordance remains between clinical assay-defined subsets and intrinsic subtype. For identifying basal-like breast cancer, the optimal HR IHC cut point was <1%, matching the American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologists guidelines. Tumors with borderline HR staining are molecularly diverse and may require additional assays to clarify underlying biology.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.292 · 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