MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Impact of reduced dose intensity of adjuvant anthracycline based chemotherapy in a population based cohort of stage I-II breast cancers

2004· article· en· W2248847637 on OpenAlexaff
Anna V. Tinker, Caroline Speers, Jeff Barnett, Ivo A. Olivotto, Stephen Chia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortBreast cancerAnthracyclineInternal medicinePopulationOncologyCyclophosphamideRetrospective cohort studyChemotherapyCancerSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

552 Background: Reductions in the dose intensity (DI) of adjuvant doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) chemotherapy in the treatment of early stage breast cancer are frequently required, with the impact on clinical outcome uncertain. We examined whether a reduced DI had an impact on relapse free survival (RFS), breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) or overall survival (OS) in a population-based cohort of early stage breast cancers treated with adjuvant AC. Methods: Women with stage I/II breast cancer treated with adjuvant AC (A: 60 mg/m2, C: 600 mg/m2 on a 21-day schedule) between 1990 and 1995 were retrospectively identified through the BCCA pharmacy database and linked to the BCCA Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit database. A dose reduction was defined as a reduction of at least one of the chemotherapy agents by at least 25% in any given cycle. Dose delay was defined as a delay in delivering treatment by at least 5 days. Cases were classified into the following 4 cohorts; cohort 1: entire course of treatment delivered at full doses and on time; cohort 2: one single dose reduction or dose delay; cohort 3: more than one dose reduction or dose delay; cohort 4: = 2 cycles of chemotherapy delivered. No growth factor support was utilized in any cases. Results: 484 cases were retrospectively identified (cohort 1: n = 268; cohort 2: n= 88; cohort 3: n= 89; cohort 4: n= 39) with a median follow-up of 9.6 years. The four cohorts were well matched for most baseline prognostic factors except for slight imbalances in lymph node status (p=0.05) and adjuvant hormonal therapy (p=0.05). 55% of the entire cohort had node positive disease. Overall 45% of cases had a reduced DI delivered. However, there were no significant differences in 8 year RFS (p=0.94), BCSS (p=0.87) and OS (p=0.86) between the 4 cohorts. The 8 year outcomes for cohorts 1–4 respectively were: RFS (72%, 74%, 74%, 68%), BCSS (80%, 77%, 82%, 80%) and OS (78%, 76%, 80%, 77%). Conclusions: Although reductions in the DI of adjuvant AC chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer was common, it did not appear to significantly impact on clinical outcomes in this cohort of patients with stage I-II breast cancer. 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)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.390 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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