MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898479222 · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdy272.283

Ribociclib (RIB) + tamoxifen (TAM) or a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) in premenopausal patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC): MONALEESA-7 patient-reported outcomes (PROs)

2018· article· en· W2898479222 on OpenAlexaff
Nadia Harbeck, F. Franke, Govind Babu, Paul Wheatley‐Price, Young‐Hyuck Im, Kadri Altundağ, Brad Lanoue, Jahangir Alam, David Chandiwana, Marco Colleoni

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLetrozoleInternal medicineClinical endpointAnastrozoleHazard ratioAromatase inhibitorTamoxifenBreast cancerQuality of life (healthcare)OncologyGoserelinProgression-free survivalPlaceboCancerRandomized controlled trialGynecologyChemotherapyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In the Phase III MONALEESA-7 trial (NCT02278120), RIB + TAM/NSAI + goserelin (GOS) significantly improved progression-free survival vs placebo (PBO) + TAM/NSAI + GOS in premenopausal pts with HR+, HER2– ABC; here we report key PRO data. Methods: Pre/perimenopausal pts (N = 672; ≤1 line of prior chemotherapy and no prior endocrine therapy for ABC) were randomized 1:1 to RIB (600 mg/day; 3 weeks on/1 week off) or PBO + TAM (20 mg/day) or an NSAI (letrozole [2.5 mg/day]/anastrozole [1 mg/day]) + GOS (3.6 mg every 28 days). Primary endpoint: PFS. PROs were a secondary endpoint and were evaluated using EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-BR23, EQ-5D-5L, and WPAI-GH questionnaires. Changes from baseline and time to 10% deterioration (TTD) in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were analyzed using linear mixed-effect and stratified Cox regression models, respectively. Results: Questionnaire compliance was high (>75%). On-treatment HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/QoL score) was maintained up to Cycle (C) 17 in both arms. From C18 onwards, HRQoL improved in the RIB arm (clinically meaningful improvements [>5 points] at C5 and from C19 to C31), but numerically worsened in the PBO arm. Median TTD in HRQoL was not reached (NR) in the RIB arm (95% CI 22.2–NR) vs 21.2 months in the PBO arm (95% CI 15.4–23.0; hazard ratio 0.699; 95% CI 0.533–0.916; p = 0.004). EORTC QLQ-C30 physical, social, and role functioning domains, and WPAI-GH % work time missed were maintained in the RIB arm; physical and role functioning were maintained for a longer duration in the RIB vs PBO arm. WPAI-GH % activity impairment was maintained in the RIB vs PBO arm. Reductions in EORTC QLQ-C30 pain score were observed up to C28 in the RIB arm and up to C17 in the PBO arm; clinically meaningful reductions were observed in the RIB arm from C3 to C11 and C22 to C28. Conclusions: RIB + TAM/NSAI + GOS improves HRQoL and maintains functioning, work productivity, and activity in premenopausal pts with HR+, HER2– ABC. RIB + TAM/NSAI + GOS is also associated with a clinically meaningful reduction in pain vs PBO + TAM/NSAI + GOS. Clinical trial identification: NCT02278120, 29 October 2014. Editorial acknowledgement: Bhavika Modasia PhD of ArticulateScience Ltd. Legal entity responsible for the study: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Funding: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Disclosure: N. Harbeck: Personal fees for lectures/consulting: Eli-Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, during the conduct of the study. P. Wheatley-Price: Personal fees for advisory boards: Novartis, AstraZeneca, Lilly Oncology, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Takeda, during the conduct of the study. B. Lanoue: Employed by Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, during the conduct of the study. J. Alam: Employment: Novartis. D. Chandiwana: Employment and stock ownership: Novartis. M. Colleoni: Fees for advisory boards: AstraZeneca, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, OBI Pharma, Puma Biotechnology, and Celldex; Honoraria: Novartis, outside the submitted work. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of OncologySame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207