Abstract P1-01-01: Circulating tumor cell number and CTC-endocrine therapy index predict clinical outcomes in ER positive metastatic breast cancer patients: Results of the COMETI Phase 2 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Only half of hormone receptor positive (HR+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients (pts) benefit from endocrine therapy (ET). Circulating tumor cells (CTC) are prognostic in pts with MBC using CellSearch® technology. The CTC-endocrine therapy index (CTC-ETI) provides semi-quantitative analyses of CTC-ER (estrogen receptor), BCL2, HER2, and Ki67 expression. We hypothesized that CTC-ETI high (elevated CTC number and/or low expression of ER and BCL2, and high expression of HER2 and Ki-67) might predict resistance to ET in a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial: COMETI-P2-2012.0 (NCT01701050). Methods: 121 pts with ER+, HER2 negative (-), and progressive MBC after one or more lines of ET or within 12 months (mos) of completing adjuvant ET, who were initiating a new ET, were enrolled after informed consent. CTC and CTC-ETI were determined as previously reported (Paoletti C et al, CCR 2015) at baseline (BL), 1, 2, 3, and 12 mos, and/or at the time of progression. Imaging was performed every 3 mos. Association of CTC levels and CTC-ETI with patient outcomes (progression free survival (PFS); rapid progression (RP) defined as progression within 3 mos) was assessed using logrank and Fisher's exact tests. Trial design estimated 85 PFS and 51 RP events, providing >90% power (2-sided a=0.05); pts with unsuccessful BL CTC-ETI or ineligible were unevaluable. Only baseline (BL) data are reported in this abstract. Results: 32% of enrolled pts had progression within 12 mos of completing adjuvant ET, whereas 40%, 20%, and 8% had 1, 2, ≥3 lines of ET for MBC. CTC-ETI was successfully determined in 93% of pts (90% CI, 88% to 97%). CTC were ≥5 CTC/7.5 ml whole blood in 37/108 (34%) pts evaluable for clinical validity. Elevated CTC was associated with worse PFS (median (m) PFS: 3.3 vs. 5.9 mos; P<0.01). Low, intermediate, and high CTC-ETI were observed in 75 (69%), 6 (6%), and 27 (25%) pts, respectively. CTC-ETI was associated with PFS (logrank P<0.01): pts with low, intermediate, and high CTC-ETI had mPFS of 5.7, 8.5, and 2.8 mos, respectively. In the 96 pts eligible for determination, elevated CTC was associated with RP, (65.6% vs. 42.2%; P=0.05) as was CTC-ETI (P=0.003): 79.2% (95% CI, 57.8% to 92.9%) of pts with high CTC-ETI had RP versus 41.2% (95% CI, 29.4% to 53.8%) with low CTC-ETI; in the small group with intermediate CTC-ETI 1 of 4 pts (25%) had RP. Conclusions: In this multi-institutional, prospective study, CTC-ETI was accurately determined, confirming the previously established analytical validity of the assay, meeting the primary objective of the trial. Elevated CTC and CTC-ETI high compared to low were associated with poor outcomes to ET. CTC-ETI distribution resulted in a small number of patients assigned to the intermediate group, restricting our ability to associate this group with outcomes. These results suggest that CTC-biomarker phenotype and enumeration have clinical validity. CTC-ETI may identify ER+ HER2– MBC pts who are unlikely to benefit from ET and might be better treated with ET in combination with other therapies or proceed to chemotherapy. Further analyses including CTC-ETI at serial time points during ET are planned. Citation Format: Paoletti C, Regan MM, Liu MC, Marcom PK, Hart LL, Smith II JW, Tedesco KL, Amir E, Krop IE, DeMichele AM, Goodwin PJ, Block M, Aung K, Cannell EM, Darga EP, Baratta PJ, Brown ME, McCormack RT, Hayes DF. Circulating tumor cell number and CTC-endocrine therapy index predict clinical outcomes in ER positive metastatic breast cancer patients: Results of the COMETI Phase 2 trial [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 P1-01-01.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".