MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911213912 · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2018.7066

Real-World Outcomes of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Node-Negative and Node-Positive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

2019· article· en· W2911213912 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zachary Veitch, Omar Khan, Derek Tilley, Domek Ribnikar, Xanthoula Kostaras, Karen King, Patricia A. Tang, Sasha Lupichuk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Cancer FoundationAlberta Health ServicesBaker Hughes (Canada)Princess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrastuzumabEpirubicinDocetaxelBreast cancerInternal medicineOncologyCarboplatinCyclophosphamideChemotherapyCancerGynecologyCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Comparative real-world outcomes for patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer receiving adjuvant trastuzumab outside of clinical trials are lacking. This study sought to retrospectively characterize outcomes for patients with node-negative and node-positive breast cancer receiving adjuvant trastuzumab in combination with docetaxel/cyclophosphamide (DCH), docetaxel/carboplatin/trastuzumab (TCH), or fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel/trastuzumab (FEC-DH) chemotherapy in Alberta, Canada, from 2007 through 2014. Methods: Disease-free survival and overall survival (OS) analyses for node-negative cohorts receiving DCH (n=111) or TCH (n=371) and node-positive cohorts receiving FEC-DH (n=146) or TCH (n=315) were compared using chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, or Cox multivariable analysis where appropriate. Results: Median follow-up was similar in node-negative (63.9 months) and node-positive (69.0 months) cohorts. The 5-year OS rates in patients with node-negative disease receiving DCH or TCH were similar (95.2% vs 96.9%; P=.268), whereas 5-year OS rates were higher but nonsignificant for patients with node-positive disease treated with FEC-DH compared with TCH (95.2% vs 91.4%; P=.160). Subgroup analysis of node-positive cohorts showed significantly improved OS with FEC-DH versus TCH in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)/progesterone receptor (PR)–positive breast cancer (98.3% vs 91.6%, respectively; P=.014). Conversely, patients with ER/PR-negative disease showed a nonsignificant trend toward higher OS rates with TCH versus FEC-DH (91.6% vs 83.3%, respectively; P=.298). Given the retrospective design, we were unable to capture all potential covariates that may have impacted treatment assignment and/or outcomes. Furthermore, cardiac toxicity data were unavailable. Conclusions: Survival rates of patients with HER2+ breast cancer in our study are comparable to those seen in clinical trials. Our findings support chemotherapy de-escalation in patients with node-negative disease and validate the efficacy of FEC-DH in those with node-positive disease.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer NetworkSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207