MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Adjuvant trastuzumab for breast cancer outside of clinical trials: Cardiotoxicity and economic evaluation

2009· article· en· W2242698910 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Snow, Chris Skedgel, Daniel Rayson, K. Thompson, M. Sellon, Penny J. Barnes, Alwin Jeyakumar, T. Younis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrastuzumabBreast cancerPopulationCohortInternal medicineClinical trialCardiotoxicityEjection fractionOncologyCancerChemotherapyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6585 Background: Clinical and economic evaluations of adjuvant trastuzumab (aTZ) in breast cancer (BC) are based on clinical trial outcomes. Population based studies however provide unique opportunities to examine outcomes in a real world setting. We previously examined aTZ uptake in all patients diagnosed with stage I-III BC over one year in Nova Scotia, Canada (Snow et al SABCS 2007). We now report cardiotoxic events (CE) and an economic evaluation based on our previous cohort. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients treated with aTZ was conducted to abstract clinical-pathological characteristics, treatment details, CEs/significant LVEF declines, and associated medical resource utilization (MRU). Cardiac risk scores (CRS) (Rastogi et al ASCO 2007) were also computed for all patients. Biserial correlation was performed to detect differences in CRS scores among subgroups. Costs associated with aTZ were based on MRU; unit costs were derived from the literature and local resources. A probabilistic model (Skedgel et al ASCO 2008) was utilized to examine the cost per quality adjusted life year gained (QALYG) at a 25-year horizon with budget impact calculated in 2009 Cdn $. Results: Of a total population of 630 patients with stage I-III BC, 37 (5.9%) received aTZ as per HERA trial treatment schedule; two (5.4%) had a CE (one death) and five (13.5%) experienced significant LVEF decline. CEs and LVEF declines were higher in patients with baseline LVEF 50–55% vs. > 55% (10% vs. 4% and 20% vs. 11%, respectively). CRS accurately predicted the observed CE rate, and was also predictive of significant LVEF decline (p = 0.056). Compared to previous estimates, the mean cost per patient of $46,070 (95%CI: $38,541-$54,422) was lower and the cost-utility of $60,439/QALYG was more favourable. Based on the observed aTZ utilization rate, a budget impact of $59.9m (95%CI: 42.5 m-79.9 m) for 2009 in Canada is expected. Conclusions: CEs and significant LVEF declines in this population based cohort appear comparable to that reported in clinical trials. Based on the aTZ costs per patient in this study, the cost-utility of aTZ is more favourable than previous estimates although the associated budget impact remains substantial. 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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.282
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.298 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→