MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004063334 · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-19-1945

Predictive Biomarkers for Adjuvant Capecitabine Benefit in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the FinXX Clinical Trial

2020· article· en· W3004063334 on OpenAlexafffund
Karama Asleh, Heather Ann Brauer, Amy Sullivan, Susanna Lauttia, Henrik Lindman, Torsten O. Nielsen, Heikki Joensuu, E. Aubrey Thompson, Saranya Chumsri

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthAcademy of FinlandMayo ClinicBreast Cancer Research FoundationSyöpäjärjestötCanadian Cancer Society
KeywordsCapecitabineMedicineOncologyInternal medicineHazard ratioTriple-negative breast cancerTaxaneBreast cancerAdjuvantProportional hazards modelCancerConfidence intervalColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Recent studies have demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant capecitabine in early breast cancer, particularly in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, TNBC is heterogeneous and more precise predictive biomarkers are needed. Experimental Design: Tumor tissues collected from TNBC patients in the FinXX trial, randomized to adjuvant anthracycline–taxane–based chemotherapy with or without capecitabine, were analyzed using a 770-gene panel targeting multiple biological mechanisms and additional 30-custom genes related to capecitabine metabolism. Hypothesis-generating exploratory analyses were performed to assess biomarker expression in relation to treatment effect using the Cox regression model and interaction tests adjusted for multiplicity. Results: One hundred eleven TNBC samples were evaluable (57 without capecitabine and 54 with capecitabine). The median follow-up was 10.2 years. Multivariate analysis showed significant improvement in recurrence-free survival (RFS) favoring capecitabine in four biologically important genes and metagenes, including cytotoxic cells [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.38; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.16–0.86, P-interaction = 0.01], endothelial (HR = 0.67; 95% CI, 0.20–2.22, P-interaction = 0.02), mast cells (HR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.49–1.27, P-interaction = 0.04), and PDL2 (HR = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12–0.81, P-interaction = 0.03). Furthermore, we identified 38 single genes that were significantly associated with capecitabine benefit, and these were dominated by immune response pathway and enzymes involved in activating capecitabine to fluorouracil, including TYMP. However, these results were not significant when adjusted for multiple testing. Conclusions: Genes and metagenes related to antitumor immunity, immune response, and capecitabine activation could identify TNBC patients who are more likely to benefit from adjuvant capecitabine. Given the reduced power to observe significant findings when correcting for multiplicity, our findings provide the basis for future hypothesis-testing validation studies on larger clinical trials.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Citations41
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cancer ResearchSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207