Palliative chemotherapy with vinorelbine or capecitabine in women with anthracycline and taxane refractory metastatic breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
773 Background: Clinicians are often faced with metastatic breast cancer refractory to anthracyclines and taxanes and must determine which subsequent type of chemotherapy produces the most benefit. Therapeutic alternatives commonly used in clinical practice include vinorelbine and capecitabine. The primary objective of this retrospective study was to compare overall survival following treatment with vinorelbine, capecitabine or both agents sequentially in women with metastatic breast cancer refractory to both anthracyclines and taxanes. Methods: Electronic patient records and charts of patients who previously received an anthracycline, taxane and vinorelbine and/or capecitabine at Toronto Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Center and Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada, between November 1st 1994 and June 1st, 2003 were retrospectively reviewed. 82 patients were entered into the study: 44 received vinorelbine as a single agent, 22 received capecitabine as a single agent and 16 patients received both agents sequentially. The primary endpoint for analysis was overall survival from the first day of therapy with either vinorelbine or capecitabine. Results: The mean duration of therapy was 63.5 days with vinorelbine and 138 days with capecitabine. Median overall survival time was 102 days for the vinorelbine group and 185 days for capecitabine (p=0.054). In the group of patients who received both agents sequentially, the mean duration of therapy was 104 days with vinorelbine and 91.5 days with capecitabine, the median overall survival was 309 days. Survival at 1 year was 15.9% for the vinorelbine group, 22.7% for the capecitabine group and 43.8% for the combined group (p=0.078). Conclusions: The findings of this exploratory analysis suggest that patients considered refractory to anthracyclines or taxanes can still obtain significant survival benefit from further chemotherapy. Capecitabine alone or sequentially with vinorelbine may offer additional survival benefits in these patients. The results of this analysis will be of value in the design of trials evaluating the benefits of chemotherapy in this setting. 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".