MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P1-10-09: Access to HER2 Testing in Early Stage Breast Cancer (ESBC) in a Single Payor, Public Healthcare System — Ontario (ON), Canada

2010· article· en· W2334630106 on OpenAlexaffabout
IL Ferrusi, M. Trudeau, C. Earle, N. B. Leighl, E. Pullenayegum, Paul Cascagnette, DA Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCohortCancer registryStage (stratigraphy)CancerPopulationOdds ratioRetrospective cohort studyReimbursementInternal medicineHealth careEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In ON, testing for HER2 overexpression in ESBC was approved, along with trastuzumab (T) treatment with chemotherapy for HER2 positive (IHC = 3 or FISH ≥2.0) tumors in 2005. Guidelines for testing and treatment must be met for provincial T reimbursement. To study adherence to HER2 testing and T utilization guidelines in ESBC, we first describe patient access to HER2 testing by age, tumor, stage, urbanicity and income. Methods: A population-based retrospective cohort of ESBC patients diagnosed in 2006 and 2007 was identified using the Ontario Cancer Registry and for whom ≥1 pathology report was available from Cancer Care Ontario (CCO). All BC-related pathology reports were individually reviewed to identify early stage, resected, primary BC. Information was collected on surgical procedure, TN stage, histologic grade, receptor status (ER/PR) and HER2 test provision. Linkage to other administrative databases provided income quintile, urban vs. rural residence and institution of diagnosis. Odds ratios were calculated to determine association of HER2 testing with any pathologic or socioeconomic factors. Results: The 2-year cohort contains 13,430 ESBC patients, 60% of which had breast conserving surgery. 29,746 (2.2/patient) pathology reports were reviewed. 13% of the cohort had rural residences, and 95% were alive at end of follow-up. Age at diagnosis was distributed as: 5% < 40 years, 18% 40-49 years, 25% 50-59 years, 24% 60- 69 years, 18% 70-79 years and 10% ≥80 years. Stage at diagnosis was: 35% stage I, 32% stage II, 10% stage III and 22% stage unknown after removing all stage IV. No differences in HER2 testing were observed for patients across income quintiles (P>0.3550). Patients ≥80 years (P<0.0001) and <40 years (p=0.0074) had significantly lower odds of receiving ≥1 HER2 test than patients 40-49 years. ESBC of higher histologic grade had significantly greater odds (P<0.0001) of ≥1 HER2 test compared to grade I ESBC. Patients from rural areas had lower odds of HER2 testing compared to urban patients (P<0.0001). Conclusions: For the 2 years 2006-2007: 13,430 ESBC patients were identified from the OCR for which ≥1 pathology report was available from CCO. Age, stage at diagnosis, and surgical procedure were representative of an ESBC population. HER2 testing was universally available per Ontario policy, but not all reports were submitted to CCO. The odds of having a documented HER2 test were not affected by income, but testing was more likely to be documented for high grade tumours and less likely to be documented for the youngest and oldest women and those with rural residence. Pathology reports missing from CCO are being sought. Adherence to guidelines for testing, treatment with T and cardiac monitoring during treatment will be assessed. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-10-09.

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)0.002
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→