Change in mammographic density with metformin use: A companion study to NCIC study MA.32.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS1608 Background: Metformin may have growth inhibitory effects on many cancer types including breast cancer. NCIC MA.32 is a randomized placebo-controlled trial examining the effects of 5 years of metformin in women with breast cancer ( http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01101438 ). This trial offers us the opportunity to explore the effects of metformin on breast cancer biomarkers to gain an understanding of the potential chemo preventive effects of this drug. The primary aim of this companion to MA.32 (Alliance trial # A211201) is to examine the effects of 1 year of metformin vs placebo on breast density for women with Estrogen Receptor negative (ER-) breast cancer. Secondary aims of this study include: evaluation of breast density following 2 years of metformin use, and correlation of density with fasting insulin, glucose and Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA). Exploratory aims include examination of the effects of metformin on second cancer rates. Methods: Eligible women must have been enrolled on MA.32 (North America accrual completed January 23, 2013), have hormone receptor-negative breast cancer, and breast composition on mammography >25% glandular density, have a digital mammogram within 12 months of registration on MA.32 and have an intact, unaffected contralateral breast. Women enrolled on this study must provide menstrual cycle data (if premenopausal) and digital mammograms. All other study related information is gathered through participation in MA.32. Mammographic density will be calculated using Cumulus software (the Boyd method). Our accrual goal is 458 patients (229 per arm) and with an assumption of 20% drop out due to drug intolerance and another 20% due to ineligibility. Therefore, with a sample size of 274 (137 per arm) we will have at least 85% power to detect a 4% difference between study arms, i.e., 5% change from baseline to one year of treatment for metformin vs. 1% for placebo, using the two-sided two-sample t-test at a significance level of 5%. This study was activated in the United States on 8/22/2012 and 15 patients have been accrued to date. This study is sponsored by the NCI and the Alliance for clinical trials. Clinical trial information: NCT01666171.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".