MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract GS5-05: Primary analysis of NRG-BR005, a phase II trial assessing accuracy of tumor bed biopsies in predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with clinical/radiological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) to explore the feasibility of breast-conserving treatment without surgery

2020· article· en· W3013712040 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Basik, Reena S. Cecchini, Jennifer F. De Los Santos, Heidi Umphrey, Thomas B. Julian, Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Julia White, Peter C. Lucas, Christa Balanoff, Antoinette R. Tan, Joseph J. Weber, David Edmonson, Ursa Brown‐Glaberman, Emilia J. Diego, Mediget Teshome, Cindy Matsen, Samantha A. Seaward, Irene Wapnir, Jamie L. Wagner, Judy A. Tjoe, Alastair M. Thompson, Norman Wolmark

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBiopsyBreast cancerClinical endpointStage (stratigraphy)RadiologyMammographySurrogate endpointPrimary tumorBreast MRICancerClinical trialInternal medicineOncologyNuclear medicineMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Increasing use of NCT regimens and improved selection of appropriate candidates has increased rates of pCR and has raised the question of whether surgical removal of the primary tumor is required for these patients (pts). To avoid surgery, the ability to predict pCR after NCT must be very accurate. Breast imaging alone (even when it includes mammogram, ultrasound, and breast MRI), is inadequate to achieve this. We hypothesized that performing core needle biopsy (bx) of the tumor bed in addition to tri-modality imaging in pts who have clinical complete response (cCR) to NCT will increase the ability to predict pCR. Methods: NRG-BR005 was planned as a two-stage Phase II trial, designed to assess the accuracy of post-NCT stereotactic tumor bed bx for pCR (absence of both invasive and DCIS residual disease), in pts with cCR and radiologic complete response (rCR)/near rCR by tri-modality imaging. Pts with operable (T1-T3, stage I/IIIA) invasive ductal carcinoma were eligible. Pts must have completed NCT and achieved a cCR as well as rCR/near rCR by mammography (mass ≤1 cm and no malignant microcalcifications), ultrasound (mass ≤2cm), and MRI (no mass with rapid rise or washout kinetics). Pts underwent marker-directed stereotactic multiple-core needle bx of the tumor bed with marker placement to facilitate BCS. The primary endpoint was the negative predictive value (NPV) of the bx, defined as the number of pts with a negative bx and confirmed pCR at BCS divided by the total number of pts with a negative bx. A bx detection NPV of >90% was required to support the feasibility of foregoing BCS. We also calculated the sensitivity of bx, defined as the number of pts with positive bx who had residual tumor at BCS divided by the total pts with residual tumor at BCS. The point estimate and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for these parameters were calculated using the exact method. Planned accrual was 175 pts in order to obtain 35 pts who had residual tumor at surgery. Results: From 8/17 to 6/19, 105 pts were accrued. As of 7/31/19, 98 pts were evaluable for analysis. Pts were 62.2% white, 87.7% non-Hispanic or Latino, 44.9% estrogen receptor-positive, and 44.9% HER2 positive. Among evaluable pts, 36 had residual disease at surgery. Stereotactic bx was positive in 18/36 pts (50%). Stereotactic bx was negative for all 62 pts who achieved pCR. NPV of the bx was 77.5% (95% CI: 66.8% to 86.1%) indicating that a negative bx provided incorrect diagnosis in 22.5% of pts. Sensitivity of the bx was 50% (95% CI: 32.9% to 67.1%) indicating that when disease was present, the bx detected it only 50% of the time. Complications from bx were reported in 7/98 evaluable pts (7.1%) (6 post-procedure hematomas, 1 breast pain). Conclusions: In the current findings of NRG-BR005, bx did not achieve an NPV of >90% and identified only 50% of the pts who had residual disease at surgery following NCT. The findings do not support breast-conserving treatment without surgery based on the study criteria for cCR and rCR/near rCR and negative tumor bed bx. Further analyses including central review of the tri-modality imaging and assessment of the imaging algorithm with and without the addition of bx are underway. Once these analyses are combined with information on biologic subtypes, a new prediction model may be defined. Support: U10CA180868, U10CA180822. Citation Format: Mark Basik, Reena S Cecchini, Jennifer F De Los Santos, Heidi R Umphrey, Thomas B Julian, Eleftherios P Mamounas, Julia White, Peter C Lucas, Christa Balanoff, Antoinette R Tan, Joseph J. Weber, David A Edmonson, Ursa A. Brown-Glaberman, Emilia J. Diego, Mediget Teshome, Cindy B Matsen, Samantha A Seaward, Irene L. Wapnir, Jamie L Wagner, Judy A Tjoe, Alastair M Thompson, Norman Wolmark. Primary analysis of NRG-BR005, a phase II trial assessing accuracy of tumor bed biopsies in predicting pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with clinical/radiological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) to explore the feasibility of breast-conserving treatment without surgery [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 GS5-05.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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