MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335344368 · doi:10.1097/ogx.0b013e3182877729

Bevacizumab Added to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

2013· article· en· W2335344368 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocetaxelMedicineCapecitabineGemcitabineBevacizumabBreast cancerOncologyCyclophosphamideChemotherapyInternal medicineDoxorubicinCancerColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy can increase the rates of breast-conserving surgery in patients with operable breast cancer and is a reasonable alternative to adjuvant chemotherapy. Several trials have shown that adding bevacizumab (an antiangiogenic monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor A) and the antimetabolites capecitabine and gemcitabine to taxanes can improve outcomes in patients with metastatic breast cancer. This trial investigated whether adding capecitabine or gemcitabine to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with docetaxel, followed by doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide in women with operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative breast cancer, would increase the rates of pathological complete response in the breast. The pathological response after the addition of bevacizumab to these neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens also was investigated; this was the primary end point of this study. A total of 1206 women with primary operable HER2-negative breast cancer were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens: (1) docetaxel (100 mg/m2 of body-surface area), administered on day 1 in 4 cycles every 3 weeks, followed by doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (60 mg and 600 mg/m2, respectively), administered every 3 weeks (docetaxel group); (2) capecitabine (825 mg/m2), administered twice daily on days 1 through 14, added to docetaxel (75 mg/m2), administered on day 1 in 4 cycles, followed by doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide (docetaxel-capecitabine group); or (3) gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2), administered intravenously on days 1 and 8, added to docetaxel (75 mg/m2), administered on day 1 in 4 cycles, followed by treatment with doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide for 4 cycles (docetaxel-gemcitabine group). Patients also were randomized to receive or not receive bevacizumab (15 mg per kg of body weight), administered every 3 weeks, with each of the first 6 cycles of chemotherapy. Compared with adding docetaxel therapy alone, the addition of capecitabine or gemcitabine did not significantly increase the rate of pathological complete response in the breast (32.7% with docetaxel, 29.7% with docetaxel-capecitabine, and 31.8% with docetaxel-gemcitabine; P = 0.69). Addition of capecitabine or gemcitabine increased toxic effects, specifically, the hand-foot syndrome, neutropenia, and mucositis. Adding bevacizumab was associated with a significant increase in the rate of pathological complete response in the breast (with and without bevacizumab: 34.5 vs 28.2%, respectively; P = 0.02). The greatest benefit of adding bevacizumab was found in the patient subgroup with hormone receptor–positive tumors; there was a weaker effect in the hormone receptor–negative subgroup. These findings show that the addition of bevacizumab to neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with a small but significant increase in the rate of pathological complete response.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0210.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.307 · 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