MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Retrospective study of neuroendocrine breast cancer cases from a single institution in Québec.

2019· article· en· W2948022903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie-Michèle Plante, Paul-Michel Houle, Catherine Prady, Samuel Martel, Sameh Geha, Michel Pavic

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances
Canadian institutionsHôpital FleurimontUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerRetrospective cohort studyOncologyCohortInternal medicineCancerPathologicalPopulationNeuroendocrine tumorsDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e12588 Background: Within numerous breast cancer types, the neuroendocrine subtype distinguishes itself from the others by its rarity. Most of the actual data comes from European and Asian retrospective studies, whom were mostly published before the 2012 WHO classification. Methods: The aim of our study was to describe a North American cohort of neuroendocrine breast cancer tumors homogenized for the latest WHO classification of 2012. We describe the clinical presentation, diagnostic, therapeutic management and prognosis of our population recensed between 2006 and 2016 at the CHUS in Sherbrooke, Québec. A pathological review of the cases was done to unify the cohort by the latest WHO classification. Results: 59 cases were identified from the 5238 cases of breast cancer evaluated between 2006 and 2016. After review from the pathologist, 9 cases were discarded since they did not meet the diagnostic criterias. 47 patients had invasive breast carcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation, 4 patients had poorly differentiated/small cell carcinoma and none had well differentiated neuroendocrine tumor. 44 patients were not metastatic whereas 7 patients were metastatic at disease onset with a mean age at diagnosis of 70 and 67 years respectively. 10% (4/44) developed a metastatic disease with a median time of 30 months. The mean size of the tumor was 26,1 mm and had a mean Ki67% of 28,3%. All of our patients were ER+, 98% PR+ and 4% Her2+. None had a triple negative disease. 6 patients were SBR grade 1, 31 were grade 2 and 12 were grade 3. The median follow-up for the non-metastatic patients was 42 months and 23 months for the metastatic patients. The median overall survival of our metastatic cohort was 30 months. The histologic subtype did not statistically influence the overall survival and the progression-free survival. Conclusions: Our study is the largest North American cohort of neuroendocrine breast cancer tumors classified with the latest WHO classification of 2012. More details about each subgroup analysis will be presented at the meeting. Even with this classification, the histologic diagnosis remains challenging. Further studies are needed to better characterize these patients and define their optimal management.

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 score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.370 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicNeuroendocrine Tumor Research Advances→French-language works237,207→