MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract P1-17-03: Statin use, site of recurrence, and survival among post-menopausal women taking bisphosphonates as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer (SWOG S0307)

2019· article· en· W2944375397 on OpenAlexaff
Darya Kizub, Jieling Miao, A. Stopeck, Paul Thompson, A. Gordon Paterson, M. Clemons, EC Dees, JN Ingle, CI Falkson, William E. Barlow, G. N. Hortobagyi, JR Gralow

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStatinInternal medicineHazard ratioBisphosphonateOncologyBreast cancerProportional hazards modelAdjuvant therapyZoledronic acidAdjuvantCancerConfidence intervalOsteoporosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Statins may mediate suppression of molecular pathways conferring benefit in cancer. Statins have shown anti-tumor effects in preclinical studies and have been associated with decreased recurrence and improved disease-specific survival. While designed to target cholesterol biosynthesis, statins can also have liver, bone and brain effects. We collected data on statin use in the S0307 adjuvant bisphosphonate trial to test the hypothesis that statin use may decrease risk of recurrence to liver, bone and brain as well as second primary (contralateral) breast cancers, and may act synergistically with bisphosphonates to decrease the risk of recurrence to bone. Patients and Methods: In S0307, 6097 patients diagnosed with Stage I-III breast cancer who had undergone surgery and were receiving adjuvant systemic therapy were randomized to receive zoledronic acid, clodronate, or ibandronate for 3 years. No significant difference was found in disease-free survival (DFS) among the 3 groups, including a sub-analysis of patients > age 55. Statin use was infrequent in younger women in S0307, consequently we analyzed statin use in those > age 55. Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine which variables were independently associated with DFS and to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Among women aged ≥ 55 years, 684 (27%) reported taking a statin at baseline and 1,848 did not. Both groups were similar in terms of hormone receptor and HER2 status (p = 0.82). Median age in the statin group was 64.3 versus 61.0 years in the no statin group, mean BMI 31.2 v. 29.5, mean tumor size 2.1cm v. 2.3cm, negative lymph nodes 60% v. 54%, Stage I disease 47% v. 36%, and receipt of chemotherapy 62% v. 71% (all p < 0.01). In the statin group, 122 (17.8%) experienced a DFS event compared to 313 (16.9%) in the no statin group (HR 1.18, CI 0.95-1.46). No difference was observed by statin use in overall recurrence (p=0.28), distant recurrence (p=0.64), or recurrences to the bone (p=0.64), liver (p=0.38) or brain (p=0.65) at initial recurrence. There was no synergy between statin use and specific bisphosphonates. Recurrence and statin useOutcomeGroup 1: On stan at baseline n=684Group 2: No statin at baseline n=1848DFS events122 (17.8%)313 (16.9%)Died without recurrence51 7.5%)97 (5.2%)Recurrence71 (10.4%)216 (11.7%)Contralateral breast cancer9 (1.3%)17 (0.9%)Distant recurrence48 (7%)157 (8.5%)Bone as 1st site of distant recurrence (% distant recurrence)31 (65%)76 (48%)Liver as 1st site of distant recurrence (% distant recurrence)6 (13%)24 (16%)Brain/CNS as 1st site of distant recurrence (% distant recurrence)5 (10%)17 (11%) Conclusions: We found no evidence that statins reduce risk of second primary breast cancers or distant metastases among post-menopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Despite promising preclinical data, they did not appear to act in synergy with a specific bisphosphonate. Though women in the statin group had less advanced disease at study entry, statin use was not associated with improved DFS. Results are limited by lack of information about type of statin used, adherence, or initiation of statin in control group. Citation Format: Kizub D, Miao J, Stopeck A, Thompson P, Paterson AH, Clemons M, Dees EC, Ingle JN, Falkson CI, Barlow W, Hortobagyi GN, Gralow JR. Statin use, site of recurrence, and survival among post-menopausal women taking bisphosphonates as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer (SWOG S0307) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-17-03.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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