MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biomarker Profiles in Trastuzumab (T) Refractory HER2+ Inflammatory Breast Cancer (IBC) That Predict for Survival Benefit from Lapatinib (L) Monotherapy.

2009· article· en· W2327283214 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Johnston, Charles Swanton, Vanessa Salazar, S. Stein, Yingjun Liu, Robert Gagnon, Maureen Trudeau, Bella Kaufman, Anne Marie Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's College Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLapatinibInternal medicineOncologyTrastuzumabCohortBiomarkerBreast cancerCancerImmunohistochemistryProgression-free survivalOverall survivalProportional hazards modelGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background:L is a reversible, oral small molecule inhibitor of EGFR and HER2. L demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) of 39%, a median progression free survival (PFS) of 14.6 weeks and a median overall survival (OS) of 11.2 months in a monotherapy Phase II study of 126 patients (pts) with HER2+ IBC (Kaufman et al. Lancet Oncology, 2009). In the initial cohort of pts we reported an association between response to L and coexpression of pHER3 with pHER2 (Johnston et al, J Clin Oncol, 2008 26; 1066-72). In this study we measured a series of biomarkers in tumor biopsies obtained before the start of treatment and evaluated their association with parameters of clinical benefit to L in relation to prior T.Methods:Core needle biopsies were obtained pretreatment, preserved in phosphatase inhibitor buffer, fixed in formalin and embedded in paraffin. Baseline expression of total and activated EGFR, HER2, HER3 and downstream markers, as well as markers specific to IBC were determined by standard IHC techniques yielding manual and optical density (OD) scores. 94/126 pts received prior T treatment before beginning L treatment, while 32 patients were T naive. The baseline expression of each marker was tested for association with ORR, PFS and OS using proportional hazards and logistic regression models.Results:OD IHC data indicated pEGFR and TGFα had statistically significant association with OS and PFS in pts treated with prior T. pHER3 also appeared to be associated with OS, although was not statistically significant. Higher levels of these biomarkers were associated with decreased hazard of progression or death. Correlation between OD and manual scores (0,1,2,3) were highly significant for these markers (R=0.80, p<0.0001). These markers were not significant when tested against ORR.[table 1] OSPFSORRpEGFR (N=56)P<0.0001, HR=0.45P=0.0192,HR=0.66P=0.2721,OR=1.44pHER3 (N=71)P=0.0634, HR=0.74P=0.1256, HR=0.78P=0.0920, OR=1.72TGFα (N=57)P=0.0019, HR=0.95P=0.0386, HR=0.97P=0.8211, OR=1.05HR; Hazard Ratio, OR; Odds Ratio (odds of response)When we evaluated the same panel of biomarkers in T naïve pts, higher levels of HER2 expression were significantly associated with improved ORR (p=0.0186) and a trend towards significance with OS (p=0.0674). Furthermore, higher levels of pAKT (p=0.0068) and pERK (p=0.006) were significantly associated with improved OS.Discussion:L monotherapy is clinically active in the treatment of relapsed/refractory HER2+ IBC. Higher levels of pEGFR and TGFa by IHC are significantly associated with improved OS and PFS but not ORR in patients with prior T therapy. In contrast, T naïve pts, higher levels of pAKT and pERK showed a significant association with OS. Thus, different biomarker profiles may predict benefit in T naïve vs T-refractory pts benefiting from L monotherapy in HER2+ IBC. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 706.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207