Multigene Expression Assay and Benefit of Radiotherapy After Breast Conservation in Ductal Carcinoma in Situ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Most women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) will receive breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and radiation (RT). RT can be omitted for women at low risk of local recurrence (LR). The Oncotype DX DCIS score (DS) predicts LR risk after BCS alone. This study assesses the impact of RT and DS on LR risk. Methods: Population-based cohort analysis of individuals with DCIS treated by BCS ± RT from 1994-2003. Treatment and outcomes were determined by linkage and chart review. We used a propensity score-adjusted multivariable model to examine associations between DS and LR and evaluate the impact of RT. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: The cohort includes 571 individuals treated by BCS alone, 689 cases treated with BCS + RT. Median follow-up was 9.4 years. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with LR include RT, age at diagnosis, tumor size, and multifocality. Adjusting for these factors, the DS risk group was statistically significantly associated with LR risk (hazard ratio high/intermediate = 1.75, 95% confidence interval = 1.28 to 2.41, P < .001). Women with a low-risk DS treated by BCS alone had an LR risk of 10.6% at 10 years and a small benefit from RT, while those with a high DS had a higher risk of LR (25.4%) after BCS alone and greater benefit from RT. A subgroup of patients with favorable clinicopathological features had a high-risk DS; these patients had a higher than expected risk of LR after BCS alone and a greater benefit with RT. Conclusions: The DS molecular assay improves risk stratification and estimates of RT benefit in individuals with DCIS treated with breast-conserving therapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".