MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610710927 · doi:10.1002/cncr.30682

Osteoporosis therapy and outcomes for postmenopausal patients with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer: NCIC CTG MA.27

2017· article· en· W2610710927 on OpenAlexafffund
Allan Lipton, Judith‐Anne W. Chapman, Kim Leitzel, Ashwani Garg, Kathleen I. Pritchard, James N. Ingle, G. Thomas Budd, Matthew J. Ellis, George W. Sledge, Manuela Rabaglio, Lei Han, Catherine Elliott, Lois E. Shepherd, Paul E. Goss, Suhail M. Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthPfizerCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteAvon Foundation for Women
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCancerHormone therapyOsteoporosisInternal medicineOncologyPostmenopausal womenPostmenopausal osteoporosisGynecologyHormoneHormone receptorBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer patients in the MA.27 trial had similar outcomes with steroidal aromatase inhibitor (AI) exemestane and nonsteroidal anastrozole. AIs increase the risk of osteoporosis. This study examined the effects of self-reported osteoporosis and osteoporosis therapy (OPT) on outcomes. METHODS: The MA.27 phase 3 adjuvant trial enrolled 7576 postmenopausal women. The primary outcome was event-free survival (EFS), and the secondary outcome was distant disease-free survival (DDFS). Patients were permitted bisphosphonates to prevent or treat osteopenia/osteoporosis. In a multivariate, stratified Cox regression, factors were significant with a 2-sided Wald test P value ≤ .05. RESULTS: Osteoporosis was reported at the baseline by 654 of the 7576 women (8.6%) and in total by 1294 patients. Oral OPT was received at the baseline by 815 of the 7576 women (10.8%) and in total by 2711 patients (36%). With a median follow-up of 4.1 years, 693 EFS events (9.15%) and 321 DDFS events (4.2%) occurred. Osteoporosis was not associated with EFS or DDFS. Few EFS events occurred before the initiation of OPT, with no substantive evidence of a time-differing effect on outcomes (nonproportional hazards). OPT (yes vs no) was significantly associated with improved EFS (hazard ratio [HR] for yes vs no, 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.80; P < .001) and DDFS (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.73; P <. 001). Time-differing (time-dependent) OPT was not (EFS; P = .45). OPT did not alter the incidence of visceral-only metastasis (P = .31). CONCLUSIONS: Oral OPT, administered to postmenopausal breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant AI therapy, was associated with improved EFS and DDFS; the time of OPT initiation (a time-dependent effect) did not affect the outcome. OPT did not alter the risk of visceral metastasis. Cancer 2017;123:2444-51. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207