MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Trastuzumab and vinorelbine (TV) in early stages of breast cancer

2009· article· en· W2242231555 on OpenAlexaff
Cristiano Ferrario, Alexander Wong, Nathaniel Bouganim, Tao Gao, Raquel Aloyz, Lawrence Panasci

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVinorelbineTrastuzumabChemotherapyRegimenStage (stratigraphy)Internal medicineSurgeryNeutropeniaBreast cancerCancerOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e11556 Background: HER-2+ breast cancers (BCs) have a higher relapse rate, even for early stages of disease. The combination of trastuzumab and vinorelbine (TV) displays a high degree of synergism both preclinically and in metastatic BC patients that typically tolerate TV remarkably well. Occasionally, patients refuse standard treatment with chemotherapy and trastuzumab because of toxic side effects. In our institution, some of these patients accepted to receive treatment with TV. Methods: We retrospectively collected data on patients with stage I-III BCs, treated with TV as the only chemotherapy regimen. Most patients received TV on a weekly basis (one week off for V every 3–4 weeks) for ∼6 months, followed by 6 more months of T only. Results: Between May 2003 and June 2008, 23 patients were started on weekly TV. Median age was 66. Five patients received TV as preoperative treatment for BCs with the following clinical stages: IIB (1); IIIA (1); IIIB (3). The other 18 patients were pathologically staged as: stage I (11); IIA (5); IIIB (2). All cancers were HER2+; 65% of patients also received hormonal treatment for ER/PR+ disease. 3 patients had been previously treated for BC, and received TV as “adjuvant” treatment after a local relapse. Only one of these patients had previously received chemotherapy, while none had received prior T. No pathological complete response was found at surgery after preoperative TV. TV was very well tolerated, with one patient developing febrile neutropenia, 4 patients grade 3–4 uncomplicated neutropenia, and no other grade 3–4 events. During therapy, 5 patients had an asymptomatic 10–20% drop in the LVEF (Grade 1). Follow-up MUGA scans at 1 year after TV so far failed to show any significant abnormality. At an average follow-up of 26 months, one patient died for non-BC related causes, and all the other 22 patients are disease-free. Conclusions: TV is safe and very well tolerated, with no significant cardiac toxicity in our patient population. Preliminary follow-up data suggest that TV may be an acceptable alternative (neo-)adjuvant therapy for patients refusing “toxic” chemotherapy. Further studies prospectively testing TV as adjuvant treatment should be considered for patients with stage 1A BC, for which no standard treatment is clearly defined. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.418 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207