MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2504241715 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2016-2269

Abstract 2269: Comparative effectiveness of everolimus + endocrine therapy vs endocrine monotherapy among postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: a multicountry retrospective chart review

2016· article· en· W2504241715 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fernando Petracci, Jose Zarba, Andrea Michelotti, Lorenzo Livi, Cristian Villanueva, Roberto Bordonaro, В М Шерстнев, Rubén Dario Kowalyszyn, Nina Marinsek, Zhou Zhou, Alexander R. Macalalad, Valerie Koo, Erich Trieschman, Jipan Xie, James Signorovitch, Barbara Ratto, Keiko Higuchi, Mahasti Saghatchian

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineExemestaneOncologyBreast cancerCancerAromatase inhibitorHazard ratioEverolimusRetrospective cohort studyMetastatic breast cancerGynecologyAromataseConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: This study aims to compare patient characteristics and outcomes of everolimus (EVE) + endocrine therapy (ET) vs ET monotherapy among postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+) human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC) across multiple countries. Methods: This retrospective chart review included postmenopausal patients with HR+/HER2- aBC who were previously treated with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) and later received EVE + ET, ET monotherapy, or chemotherapy (the index treatment) from 17 sites in 6 countries (Canada, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Russia, and Argentina). This is a subset analysis comparing patients who received EVE + ET vs ET monotherapy. Stratified sampling by index treatment and line of therapy was used to ensure the sample groups included different treatments and lines of therapy. Patient characteristics were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact tests for categorical variables. Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and was compared between the 2 groups using Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for age, country, line of therapy, metastatic sites, symptoms, comorbidities, prior chemotherapy, recurrent vs de novo cancer, and time from the last adjuvant ET to aBC diagnosis. Results: A total of 119 patients in the EVE + ET group (77 in 1st/2nd, and 42 in 3rd/4th lines) and 102 patients in the ET monotherapy group (76 in 1st /2nd, and 26 in 3rd/4th lines) were included in the study. All but 2 patients in the EVE + ET group received EVE + exemestane; ET monotherapy included fulvestrant (46.1%), exemestane (21.6%), NSAIs (16.7%), and tamoxifen (14.7%). Patients in the EVE + ET group were numerically younger (median 63.0 vs 66.0 years; P = .10); appeared to have fewer comorbidities, particularly hypertension (11.8% vs 35.3%; P < .01); had a higher proportion of visceral metastasis (43.7% vs 32.4%; P = .10) and a higher number of metastatic sites (median 2.0 vs 1.0; P = .14); had a lower proportion of bone/joint symptoms (30.3% vs 42.2%; P = .07); and had a shorter time from initiation of the last adjuvant ET to aBC diagnosis (median 43.1 vs 55.6 months; P = .05). In the unadjusted analysis, patients in the EVE + ET group had similar PFS as those in the ET monotherapy group (median 9.1 vs 9.2 months; unadjusted HR = 0.98; P = .90), but after adjustment for baseline characteristics, the hazard of progression or death of any cause was lower (adjusted HR = 0.67; P = .05). Conclusions: Patients who received EVE + ET tended to be younger with fewer comorbidities yet have disease with faster progression and a higher burden of metastases. After adjusting for these characteristics, EVE + ET was associated with longer PFS compared with ET monotherapy. Citation Format: Fernando Petracci, Jose Zarba, Andrea Michelotti, Lorenzo Livi, Cristian Villanueva, Roberto Bordonaro, Viktor Sherstnev, Rubén Kowalyszyn, Nina Marinsek, Zhou Zhou, Alexander Macalalad, Valerie Koo, Erich Trieschman, Jipan Xie, James Signorovitch, Barbara Ratto, Keiko Higuchi, Mahasti Saghatchian. Comparative effectiveness of everolimus + endocrine therapy vs endocrine monotherapy among postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer: a multicountry retrospective chart review. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 2269.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207