MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract P2-18-02: Fractures in women with breast cancer receiving high-dose bisphosphonates to prevent breast cancer metastases as part of the SWOG S0307 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00127205)

2020· article· en· W3013661685 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel L. Yung, Jieling Miao, Alexander Paterson, Mark Clemons, Elizabeth Claire Dees, James N. Ingle, Carla I. Falkson, William E. Barlow, Gabriel N. Hortobágyi, Julie R. Gralow

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineCancerZoledronic acidOncologyRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectTamoxifenSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Evidence from randomized trials, including a recent meta-analysis, suggests that adjuvant bisphosphonates can decrease recurrence and death in postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Bisphosphonates (BP) have been included as adjuvant therapy for postmenopausal breast cancer patients in multiple guidelines. SWOG S0307 compared efficacy of 3 BPs in early stage breast cancer, with no evidence of differences in efficacy on breast cancer outcomes by type of bisphosphonate, either in the overall analysis or subgroups. BPs are generally well tolerated, with a relatively low risk of serious adverse effects. Treatment for hormone sensitive breast cancer frequently includes treatment with an aromatase inhibitor (AI) or ovarian function suppression (OFS), both of which can accelerate bone loss, decrease bone density, and increase fractures. In addition to decreasing breast cancer events, BPs have been shown to decrease fractures in breast cancer patients receiving AIs or OFS. However, concerns have been raised about the risk of atypical femur fractures (AFF), a rare subtype of fragility fractures, which appear to increase with longer BP use (3-100/100,000 person-years) (Shane 2013). This substudy evaluated all fractures occurring in patients enrolled on S0307. Methods: Patients with stage I-III breast cancer who were receiving adjuvant systemic therapy were randomized to receive 3 years of intravenous zoledronic acid (ZA) 4 mg IV given every 4 weeks for the first six months, and then every 3 months for the following 2.5 years, oral clodronate (CLOD) 1,600 mg/day orally, or oral ibandronate (IBAN) 50 mg/day orally. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). On-treatment data collection forms specifically queried whether a fracture had occurred during the reporting period, the site of the fracture, and whether or not it was associated with trauma. Results: A total of 6,097 patients were randomized to S0307, with a median age of 53 years. Rates for overall fractures at 7.7 years were higher for CLOD (9.3%) compared to IBAN (7.4%) and ZA (7.1%) (p=0.02), with differences being mostly in the spine. Traumatic fracture differences were not significant (CLOD 2.0%, ZA 1.9%, IBAN 1.7%; p=0.83). Fragility fracture rates were 5.2% with ZA, 7.2% with CLOD, and 5.6% with IBAN. Ankle fractures were the most common fracture site at 2.8% overall. Leg fractures, including femur fractures, were relatively low with a rate of 1.5% overall and not different between agents. AFF were not specifically queried/determined. Conclusion: In S0307, BPs were used in higher doses than is recommended for treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. There is limited data comparing the long-term effects across BP drugs used at these higher doses on the skeleton. In S0307, an overall fracture rate of 8% was seen in early stage breast cancer patients despite receiving BPs along with conventional systemic therapy. Fracture rates were slightly higher for CLOD than ZA and IBAN for fragility and overall fractures, but similar for traumatic fractures. This may reflect the potency of CLOD or the dosing schedule. Rates of femur fractures were relatively low in all arms without evidence of excess femur fractures. Funding: NIH/NCI CA180888, CA180819, CA180820, CA180821, CA180868, CA180863, CA196175; BCRF, Komen, Berlex (Bayer), Roche/Genentech, Novartis. Citation Format: Rachel L (MD) Yung, Jieling Miao, Alexander HG Paterson, Mark Clemons, Elizabeth C Dees, James N Ingle, Carla I Falkson, William Barlow, Gabriel N Hortobagyi, Julie R Gralow. Fractures in women with breast cancer receiving high-dose bisphosphonates to prevent breast cancer metastases as part of the SWOG S0307 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00127205) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-18-02.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.355 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBone health and treatments→French-language works237,207→