MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Outcomes of women with small, early-stage breast cancer in Manitoba from 2006-2011.

2017· article· en· W2625905438 on OpenAlexaffabout
Han‐Bo Zhang, Pascal Lambert, Aly‐Khan A. Lalani, Katherine Fradette, Rashid Ahmed, Debjani Grenier, Marshall Pitz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsCancerCare ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrastuzumabBreast cancerInternal medicineHazard ratioOncologyStage (stratigraphy)CancerProportional hazards modelCumulative incidenceIncidence (geometry)Cancer registryGynecologyCohortUnivariate analysisTamoxifenMultivariate analysisConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e12000 Background: The incidence of early-stage breast cancers has increased dramatically over the past decades. Treatment decisions for patients with stage I breast cancers are challenging, as there are significant variations in outcomes based on biologic subtypes. The objectives were to describe the distribution, molecular phenotypes, management, and long-term outcomes of women with early-stage breast cancer (T1mic/T1a/T1b N0 M0) in Manitoba from 2006-2011. Methods: Using the Manitoba Cancer Registry, we created a retrospective cohort of patients with primary breast cancer of ≤1.0 cm, diagnosed between 2006 and 2011. Data included patient demographics, tumour size, treatment modalities (surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and trastuzumab), estrogen-receptor (ER) and progesterone-receptor (PR) status, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status. Node-positive cancers were excluded. Patient outcomes were evaluated, including rates of recurrence and overall survival using univariate and multivariable models. Kaplan-Meier curves and cumulative incidence curves were used to illustrate overall survival and recurrence, respectively. Results: Our study included 733 women. Mean age at diagnosis was 62. ER/PR positivity and HER2 positivity (HER2+) were 84% and 8.9%, respectively. Tumours were: T1mic in 14.0%, T1a in 19.1%, and T1b in 66.9%. 98% of patients had surgery, 60% had adjuvant radiation, 3.8% received trastuzumab, and 11% received chemotherapy. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for disease recurrence for patients with HER2+ versus HER2- status was 4.31 (95% CI, 2.18 to 8.50; P = 0.0001), and the HR for overall survival was 1.63 (95% CI, 0.72 to 3.67; P = 0.2402). The HR for disease recurrence in HER2+ patients receiving trastuzumab versus HER2+ patients who did not receive trastuzumab was 1.92 (95% CI, 0.61 to 5.97; P = 0.2621). Conclusions: HER2-positivity appears to be an important risk factor for recurrence in small, early-stage breast cancers. In our cohort, trastuzumab did not appear to reduce the risk of recurrence compared to those who did not receive it. This may be due to limited power and selection bias, in which patients with higher risk cancers received trastuzumab.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.328 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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