Central reporting of human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status and adherence to testing and adjuvant trastuzumab treatment guidelines in Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
166 Background: Quality monitoring pertaining to trastuzumab treatment requires knowledge of 1) HER2 status, 2) testing methods and sequence, and 3) treatment received. We examined the patterns of HER2 test documentation for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) patients in Ontario and the adherence of practice patterns to Canadian HER2 testing consensus guidelines and adjuvant trastuzumab treatment guidelines from Cancer Care Ontario (CCO). Methods: Using tumor pathology reported centrally to the Ontario Cancer Registry (OCR) a population-based retrospective cohort of ESBC patients diagnosed in 2006 or 2007 was identified. We evaluated the use of subsequent HER2 fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) after initial immunohistochemical testing, and predictors of trastuzumab use. HER2 test type, sequence, result(s) and status, tumour grade, and hormone receptor status were determined. Trastuzumab treatment was determined from linked drug funding records. Sociodemographic characteristics, prior surgical, radiation and anthracycline treatment, and comorbidity were also determined from administrative data sources. Logistic models estimated adjusted odds ratios for factors associated with guideline (non-)adherence. Results: A HER2 test was documented for 66% of the 13,396 patient cohort. HER2 equivocal tumors were more likely to be retested vs. positive: OR 116 (95% confidence interval [CI] 79, 169). Patients diagnosed with stage III disease had higher odds of having a FISH test vs. stage I (OR 1.5 [CI 1.1, 2.1]). HER2 status was the largest predictor of trastuzumab use, with HER2 equivocal, negative or unknown patients less likely to receive treatment than positive. Patients with advanced age (≥70y) had lower odds of trastuzumab treatment compared to younger patients (OR 0.48 [0.32, 0.73]). Higher tumor grade was associated with higher odds of treatment. Reporting, testing, and treatment all varied significantly by region. Conclusions: Despite limitations in centrally-reported tumour pathology at the time, the use of FISH testing and trastuzumab treatment in Ontario was largely consistent with guidelines, though practices vary across regions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".