MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P5-16-17: Population based long term outcomes of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage I-III breast cancer: The British Columbia experience

2017· article· en· W2592269944 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jide Sun, Lovedeep Gondara, Rekha M. Diocee, Caroline Speers, C Lohrisch, S. Chia

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineOncologyPopulationStage (stratigraphy)TrastuzumabNeoadjuvant therapyChemotherapyCancerCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is a treatment option for breast cancer patients (pts) with locally advanced disease and for pts with operable breast cancer who desire breast conservation. Neoadjuvant therapy also allows for early evaluation of the effectiveness of systemic therapy. Pathologic complete response (pCR) has been shown in clinical trials to be associated with improved survival. The objective of this study was to determine if the outcomes demonstrated in clinical trials can be applied in the population based setting by comparing the outcomes of breast cancer pts who achieved pCR (no invasive disease in breast and nodes) vs. those that did not achieve a pCR. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of stage I-III invasive breast cancer pts treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy from 2005 to 2010 in British Columbia. Cases were identified from the Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit database. Data was collected on demographics, tumor pathology, and type of treatment (chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, trastuzumab) and linked to standard clinical outcomes. Results: 267 pts who met inclusion criteria were identified, of whom 5% had stage I, 33% Stage II and 59% Stage III breast cancer. Median follow up was 7.4 years. Overall 74 pts (28%) demonstrated a pCR and 193 pts did not. pCR pts had better 5-yr overall survival (OS) vs. non-pCR pts: 88% vs. 73% (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.82, p=0.01). 5-yr disease free survival (DFS) was 84% in pCR pts vs. 70% in non-pCR pts (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24-0.83, p=0.01). Similarly, 5-yr breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) and distant disease free survival (DDFS) were significantly better in favor of the pCR cohort: HR 0.39 (95% CI 0.18-0.82, p=0.01) and HR 0.45 (95% CI 0.24-0.83, p=0.02) respectively. pCR pts were more likely to be HER2-positive and/or ER negative. Conclusions: Our population based results showed that early stage breast cancer pts who achieved pCR after neoadjuvant chemotherapy had better outcomes on all survival parameters compared to pts who did not achieve a pCR. This finding is consistent with results from neoadjuvant clinical trials and the FDA meta-analysis. These 'real world' results demonstrate that pCR can be used as a surrogate endpoint for survival outcomes even among non-trial pts. Citation Format: Sun J, Gondara L, Diocee R, Speers C, Lohrisch C, Chia S. Population based long term outcomes of pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage I-III breast cancer: The British Columbia experience [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-16-17.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→