MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953561458 · doi:10.5152/ejbh.2019.4901

The Oncotype Dx Assay in ER-Positive, HER2-Negative Breast Cancer Patients: A Real Life Experience from a Single Cancer Center

2019· article· en· W2953561458 on OpenAlex
Stéphane Thibodeau, Ioannis A. Voutsadakis

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Breast Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsEssar Steel Algoma (Canada)Sault Area HospitalNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortInternal medicineBreast cancerOncologyCancerChemotherapyStage (stratigraphy)Estrogen receptorAdjuvant chemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of the Oncotype Dx assay on the treatment of patients with Estrogen Receptor (ER)-positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, axillary lymph node-negative or micrometastatic carcinoma of the breast in a single cancer center. In addition, patients with intermediate Oncotype Dx recurrence scores were analyzed to assess the factors influencing therapeutic decisions for adjuvant chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from medical records of women diagnosed with carcinoma of the breast and qualified for the Oncotype Dx assay were extracted (OncoDx cohort). Patient demographic and cancer characteristics, genomic report, and course of treatment data, including survival outcomes and treatment decision-making, were analyzed. A matched cohort of patients with similar tumor stage and biology (ER-positive, HER2-negative) from the era before the introduction of the Oncotype Dx assay was analyzed for comparison (pre-OncoDx cohort). RESULTS: Two hundred and one patients were included in the OncoDx cohort and one hundred and sixty patients were included in the pre-OncoDx cohort. Oncotype Dx recurrence score (RS) was low (<11) in fifty-six patients (28%), intermediate (11-25) in one hundred and twenty-three patients (61.5%) and high (>25) in twenty one patients (10.5%). Demographic and cancer clinicopathologic characteristics between OncoDx and pre-OncoDx cohorts were similar. Overall, 10.9% of the patients in the OncoDx cohort received adjuvant chemotherapy, versus 23.8% of the patients in the pre-OncoDx cohort (Fisher exact p=0.003). Fewer patients were recommended adjuvant chemotherapy in the OncoDx era compared to the pre-OncoDx era (17.9% vs 30.6%, respectively, Fisher exact p=0.006). The decision to recommend chemotherapy within the intermediate-risk cohort was influenced by the patient's RS. The mean RS of patients in the intermediate-risk cohort who did not receive chemotherapy was 21.5 while the score of those that received chemotherapy was 24.6 (p=0.000). The series confirmed excellent PFS and OS for both OncoDx and pre-OncoDx cohorts. CONCLUSION: This single cancer center analysis confirms the avoidance of chemotherapy in the great majority of patients with early ER-positive, HER2-negative, lymph node-negative or micrometastatic carcinoma of the breast since the introduction of the Oncotype Dx assay. A higher recurrence risk score within the intermediate group may influence the decision for chemotherapy inclusion in the adjuvant treatment plan. A lower PR percentage by IHC and higher grade may predict higher Oncotype Dx scores.

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.

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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.257 · 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