MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2322721767 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.sabcs-1134

NCIC CTG MA.17: hormone receptor expression of in-breast recurrences and contralateral primary breast cancers arising on aromatase inhibitors.

2009· article· en· W2322721767 on OpenAlexaff
Beverly Moy, D. Tu, LE Shepherd, MJ Palmer, JN Ingle, PE Goss

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLetrozoleTamoxifenBreast cancerExemestaneOncologyInternal medicineAromataseEstrogen receptorRaloxifeneSelective estrogen receptor modulatorPlaceboGynecologyCancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract #1134 Background: The selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) tamoxifen and raloxifene reduce the risk of ER+ (but not ER-) invasive breast cancers in healthy women at high risk for developing breast cancer. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) given as adjuvant therapy to treatment-naïve or post-tamoxifen patients significantly reduce the risk of in-breast recurrences (IBRs) and contralateral breast cancers (CBCs) and are currently in clinical trials for breast cancer prevention (NCIC CTG MAP.3 and IBIS-II). It is hypothesized that SERMS inhibit promotion of ER+ breast cancer whereas AIs may reduce both ER+ and ER- breast cancer by inhibiting both tumor initiation and promotion. Little is known about the characteristics of IBRs and CBCs that arise on AI therapy. We present the ER/PR expression and clinicopathologic features of IBRs and CBCs that occurred on MA.17. Methods: We examined ER/PR status of IBRs and CBCs that arose on letrozole vs. placebo among women enrolled in MA.17, a placebo-controlled (PLAC) trial of letrozole (LET) following 5 years of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer. Results: Seventy-one patients (pts) developed an IBR and 87 developed a CBC on trial. Consistent with results previously reported, fewer IBRs (LET 20 vs PLAC 51) and CBCs (LET 35 vs PLAC 52) were observed in the LET group. ER and PR status is currently available on 35 women with an IBR and 39 with a CBC. The majority of IBRs were ER+ in both the LET and PLAC groups (10/11 [91%] vs 18/24 [75%], respectively; p=NS) but numbers of both ER+ and – IBRs were less in LET group, suggesting that letrozole may decrease both ER+ and ER- IBRs. CBCs that arose on PLAC were more likely to be ER+ than on LET (16/22 [73%] vs 6/19 pts [32%], respectively; p=0.01), suggesting that letrozole predominantly prevents ER+ CBCs. Discordance in ER expression between primary breast cancer and IBRs among women randomized to LET vs. PLAC was observed in 1/11 [9%] and 6/24 [26%] women respectively (p=NS) and between primary breast cancer and CBCs in 12/18 pts [67%] vs. 6/21 [29%] women respectively (p=0.01). Other clinicopathologic characteristics such as grade, tumor size, PR, HER-2/neu, and nodal status of IBRs and CBCs will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: Extended adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole results in fewer IBRs and CBCs compared with placebo as previously reported. Our data suggests that letrozole may decrease both ER+ and ER- IBRs. Letrozole appears to prevent ER+ CBCs but has little or no apparent effect on the development of ER- CBCs. These results need confirmation in the primary prevention trials of AIs. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 1134.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 venueCancer Research→Same topicEstrogen and related hormone effects→French-language works237,207→