MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effect of osteoporosis in postmenopausal breast cancer patients randomized to adjuvant exemestane or anastrozole: NCIC CTG MA.27.

2012· article· en· W3012557015 on OpenAlexaff
Lois E. Shepherd, Judy‐Anne W. Chapman, Suhail M. Ali, Liting Zhu, Kim Leitzel, Paul E. Goss, Allan Lipton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExemestaneAnastrozoleOsteoporosisInternal medicineBreast cancerOncologyClinical endpointAromatase inhibitorProportional hazards modelCancerAromataseRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

501 Background: NCIC CTG MA.27 compared adjuvant steroidal [exemestane (E)] and non-steroidal [anastrozole (A)] aromatase inhibitors (AIs) and showed neither to be superior in breast cancer outcomes. AIs are known to increase the risk of osteoporosis. We examined the effects of baseline or subsequent self reported osteoporosis on disease outcomes. Methods: MA.27 enrolled 7,576 women. Event free survival (EFS) was the primary endpoint. Distant disease-free-survival (DDFS) was a secondary outcome. MA.27 permitted bisphosphonates to prevent or treat osteopenia or osteoporosis unless prohibited by enrollment to one of two cohorts in a bone substudy. Osteoporosis was considered present for this analysis if reported at baseline or prior to relapse or breast cancer death. Multivariate stratified Cox regression was used to examine the effects of trial therapy, osteoporosis, baseline patient and tumour characteristics on EFS; DDFS; bone only relapse; bone concurrent with other relapse; and non-bone recurrence. Bone marrow recurrence (N=8) was excluded. Results: Osteoporosis was reported at baseline by 654 of 7576 (8.6%) women, and prior to relapse by an additional 661 women. EFS events occurred in 693/7576 (9.15%). Osteoporosis was significantly associated with better EFS [HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.66-0.99), p=0.04] with no difference in multivariate HR of E vs A: 1.02, 95% CI 0.88-1.19, p=0.77. Women experienced 313 (4.1%) DDFS events. Osteoporosis was associated with better DDFS [HR 0.71 (95% CI 0.51-0.98), p=0.04], adjusted HR of E to A: 0.94 (95% CI of 0.75-1.17), p=0.56. Both EFS and DDFS interactions of osteoporosis with trial therapy were not significant (p>0.05). Osteoporosis was not significantly associated with the site of relapse. Conclusions: Osteoporosis had a significant prognostic association with improved EFS and DDFS in women treated with AIs. We plan to investigate the use of bisphosphonates, raloxifene treatment prior to randomization, and markers of bone resorption with outcome.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.423 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBone health and treatments→French-language works237,207→