Quality of life (QoL) and symptoms evaluation in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patients (pts) treated with eribulin: Preliminary results of a prospective observational study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e12031 Background: Eribulin (E) is a nontaxane microtubule inhibitor currently indicated for third-line chemotherapy (CHT) of MBC. To evaluate its tolerability and impact on QoL and symptoms improvement in MBC pts, from April 2012, we conducted a prospective observational study. Methods: Pts pretreated with anthracycline (A) and taxane (T) who has received 2 CHT lines for MBC, scheduled to be treated with E were considered eligible. Pts complete the Edmonton Symptoms Assessment Scale (ESAS) at each cycle and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) every 2 cycles. Outcome of QoL included the FACT-B total score, FACT-General (FACT-G) score and the Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score. Groups of data were analyzed using ANOVA and the Friedman test. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival calculation. Overall Survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method. Results: 25 consecutive MBC pts entered the study. Median age 65 (range 31-77), PS (ECOG) 0-1 96%, 24% had triple-negative MBC, 70% ER/PgR positive and 5% HER2 positive. All pts were pretreated with A and T, 19 (76%) also with capecitabine. Median cycles 6 (range 3-13), 36% received more than 6 cycles. Five pts are to early for evaluation. Of the 20 evaluable pts main toxicity were: alopecia G1 58% and G2 42%, asthenia G2 40% peripheral neuropathy G2 25% neutropenia G2 0% and G3-G4 10%.At a median follow-up of 6 months 16% of pts achieved partial response (PR) 44% stable disease (SD) and 20% progressive disease; disease control rate (PR+SD ≥ 6 m) occurred in 40% of pts. Median PFS is 5 m (95% CI, 4-6) currently 70% of pts are alive. Data of ESAS and QoL are reported in table. Conclusions: Our preliminary results shows that treatment with E is associated with a significant improvement of ESAS scores (p=0.03) mainly in responders pts (p=0.02) and with a good maintenance of QoL with expected and manageable toxicities. Data collection is ongoing and update results will be presented. [Table: see text]
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".