MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P3-08-08: Prognostic associations of plasma hepcidin in early breast cancer (BC)

2018· article· en· W2793314752 on OpenAlexaff
KJ Jerzak, AE Lohmann, Marguerite Ennis, Elizabeta Nemeth, Tomas Ganz, PJ Goodwin

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepcidinMedicineInternal medicineBreast cancerProportional hazards modelFerroportinGastroenterologyCancerProspective cohort studyOncologySoluble transferrin receptorAnemiaEndocrinologyIron deficiencyIron status

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Intra-tumor RNA expression of hepcidin has been linked to adverse metastasis-free survival in women with early BC, but the prognostic implications of this inflammatory marker and iron-regulating peptide are unknown. Methods: Using an ELISA assay, we measured plasma hepcidin in the banked blood of 518 women who were recruited from 1989-1996 for a prospective cohort study regarding diet and lifestyle factors in BC. Blood had been obtained 4-12 weeks post-operatively and prior to treatment with radiation, chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Women ages 18 to 75 with T1-3, N0-1, M0 BC who underwent surgery and axillary dissection were included; those with metabolic disorders were excluded. Tumor size, grade and ER/PR expression were abstracted from pathology reports; HER2 status was unknown. Median follow-up was 12.1 years (range, 0.2 to 17 years). Univariable Cox regression models were used to determine the association between hepcidin and i) time to distant BC recurrence (primary outcome), and ii) time to death due to any cause. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were adjusted for age (continuous), T stage (T2, T3, Tx vs T1), tumor grade (3 vs 2 or 1), N stage (node positive vs negative), ER/PR expression (both ER and PR negative vs either positive) a-priori. Associations between hepcidin and CRP, IL6, insulin, cholesterol, glucose, vitamin D, total iron, transferrin, and soluble transferrin receptor; sTfR were explored (Pearson's coefficients). Results: Hepcidin ranged from 4.70-190.70 ng/L (median 16.25; IQR 16.40 ng/L). To ensure normal distribution, a transformed [-1/sqrt (x)] hepcidin variable was used for prognostic analyses. Average age was 50.3±9.7 years. 16% were obese [body mass index (BMI) >30kg/m2], 30% (n=156) were node positive, 35% (n=181) had grade 3 tumors and 71% (n=370) had ER and/or PR positive tumors. 77% underwent a lumpectomy, 73% (n=380) received adjuvant radiotherapy and 39% (n=203) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Plasma hepcidin was not univariably associated with either time to distant BC recurrence (HR for 75th percentile versus 25th 1.20; 95%CI 0.79-1.32) or time to death due to any cause (HR 1.23; 95%CI 0.95-1.59) in the overall cohort; multivariable results were similar. In pre-planned analyses, the prognostic association of hepcidin differed by BMI (≤30 vs >30 kg/m2; interaction p-values <0.05): among obese women, higher hepcidin was significantly associated with a shorter time to distant BC recurrence in both univariable (HR 1.81; 95%CI 1.06–3.10) and multivariable (HR 1.84; 95%CI 1.04–3.25) models. Higher hepcidin was associated with shorter time to death due to any cause in a univariable model (HR 1.91; 95%CI 1.13–3.22) but not in a multivariable analysis. There was a moderate association between hepcidin and total iron (r=0.35), transferrin (r=0.43) and sTfR (r=-0.39); associations with IL6, CRP and metabolic factors were very weak (r<0.2). Conclusion: Higher plasma hepcidin was independently associated with a shorter time to distant BC recurrence in obese women but not in the overall cohort. Further investigation of hepcidin and mechanisms linking it to adverse BC outcomes is warranted. Citation Format: Jerzak KJ, Lohmann AE, Ennis M, Nemeth E, Ganz T, Goodwin PJ. Prognostic associations of plasma hepcidin in early breast cancer (BC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-08-08.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.329 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207