MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Evaluation of the adjuvant radiation treatment-effect heterogeneity using genomic signature for locoregional relapse and long-term outcome.

2014· article· en· W2602979286 on OpenAlexaff
Maggie C.U. Cheang, Charles M. Perou, Timothy J. Whelan, Cheng Fan, Tinne Laurberg, David Voduc, Scott Tyldesley, Torsten O. Nielsen, Karen A. Gelmon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer AgencyJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineOncologyBreast cancerCyclophosphamideRandomized controlled trialChemotherapyMastectomyAdjuvantRadiation therapyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1031 Background: In a retrospective analysis of two similar randomized radiation therapy (RT) trials (i.e. British Columbia (BC) and DBCG 82b), we reported significant survival benefits for post-mastectomy RT in Luminal A. Here we examined the predictive value of additional genomic profiles in the BC trial for loco-regional recurrences (LRR) and breast cancer survival (BCSS) in node-positive, pre-menopausal breast cancer patients randomized to adjuvant chemoradiation or chemotherapy. Methods: In the BC trial, 318 patients received adjuvant cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil and were randomized to with or without postmastectomy RT. From 145 formalin fixed paraffin embedded tissues available, expression profiles of 66 genes were done with the Nanostring nCounter. Treatment effects on LRR and BCSS events were examined by subpopulation treatment effect pattern plots. The research-based PAM50 proliferation score, Risk of Recurrence score (ROR-T and ROR-PT), and genes related to basal-like (ie. 13-genes VEGF-signature (VEGF-s), RAD17, RAD50 and RB1) were calculated. Results: Overall, patients in the RT arm (n= 69) were significantly associated with better LRR and BCSS than the non-RT-treated arm (n = 76). No significant treatment-effect heterogeneity was detected for VEGF-s, RAD17 and RAD50 score. Patients with lower RB1 mRNA level, and higher proliferation score, had better LRR survival when they received RT (Table). The patterns of treatment efficacy on LRR and BCSS were the most significant for the varying levels of risk score (ROR-T, -PT), particularly for patients with higher scores (Table) who showed the poorest prognosis, but whom may still benefit from adjuvant RT. Conclusions: RB1, proliferation score and ROR-T predicted LRR and BCSS benefit for adjuvant RT. The clinical utility of these biomarkers as predictor requires confirmation in a second independent trial. STEPP analysis of the treatment effect of adjuvant RT at 10-years. Covariate Interaction test P LRR BCSS RB1 mRNA level KM 0.08 0.49 HR 0.03 0.41 Proliferation score KM 0.02 0.17 HR 0.06 0.24 ROR-T KM 0.01 < 0.001 HR 0.21 0.02 ROR-PT KM 0.02 0.09 HR 0.1 0.04 Abbreviations: KM, Kaplan–Meier; HR, hazard ratio.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.331 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→