Outcomes for advanced HER2-positive gastroesophageal cancer by anatomical location: Experience from the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
131 Background: The landmark ToGA trial established trastuzumab (T) based therapy as the standard of care for advanced HER2+ gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer. However, outcomes for T based therapy for HER2+ esophageal cancer have not been well characterized. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients (pts) with HER2+ gastroesophageal cancer receiving T based therapy at our institution from 2011-2016. Distal esophagus ( < 35 cm) and Siewert type I/II tumours were defined as esophageal (E). Siewert type III and stomach tumours were defined as gastric (G). Trained abstractors collected pt demographics and treatment details. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated from the date of first T treatment. Chi-square tests, t-tests and Cox proportional hazards models were applied where appropriate. Results: We identified 87 pts with advanced HER2+ disease. 62% (n = 54) had de novo metastatic (M1) disease. 57 patients were treated with T based therapy, with median age 57 years (IQR 48-67), 91% baseline performance status 0-1, 19% female, and 7% Asian. 63% (n = 36) had E and 37% (n = 21) had G primary tumours. 67% (n = 38) presented with M1 disease. 33% (n = 19) underwent surgery with curative intent and received T based therapy at recurrence. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the E and G groups. Survival data were available for 51 patients. The E and G groups did not have significant differences in PFS (median 9.5 vs. 9.1 months, HR 0.89 (95% CI 0.44-1.80), p = 0.74) or in OS (median 15.8 vs. 14.2 months, HR 0.88 (95% CI 0.42-1.82), p = 0.73). 63% (n = 36) were treated with subsequent systemic therapy after progression on T, with 23 receiving one line, 9 receiving two lines and 4 receiving three additional lines of treatment. The number subsequent therapies received was similar between E and G groups. Conclusions: Although patients with distal esophagus tumours were not included in the ToGA trial, our analysis suggests that patients with E and G tumours had similar outcomes. Our contemporary cohort had comparable survival outcomes relative to patients receiving T in the ToGA trial (median PFS = 6.7 months, median OS = 13.8 months).
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".