MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

2017· article· en· W2592927667 on OpenAlexaff
Costanza Paoletti, MM Regan, MC Liu, P. Kelly Marcom, L. Hart, J. Smith, KL Tedesco, Eitan Amir, IE Krop, A. DeMichele, PJ Goodwin, M Block, KoKo Aung, EM Cannell, EP Darga, PJ Baratta, ME Brown, R J McCormack, DF Hayes

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetastatic breast cancerInternal medicineCirculating tumor cellOncologyProgression-free survivalBreast cancerCancerAdjuvantClinical trialChemotherapyMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.381 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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