MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biomarker data from KATHERINE: A phase III study of adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) versus trastuzumab (H) in patients with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy for HER2-positive breast cancer.

2020· article· en· W3031646075 on OpenAlexaff
Carsten Denkert, Chiara Lambertini, Peter A. Fasching, Katherine L. Pogue–Geile, Max S. Mano, Michael Untch, Norman Wolmark, Chiung-Sheng Huang, Sibylle Loibl, Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Gϋnter von Minckwitz, Charles E. Geyer, Thomas Boulet, Chunyan Song, Gail D. Lewis Phillips, Małgorzata Nowicka, Sanne de Haas, Mark Basik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersRoche
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerOncologyTrastuzumabInternal medicineNeoadjuvant therapyAdjuvantPopulationBiomarkerCancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

502 Background: The phase 3 KATHERINE study (NCT01772472) compared adjuvant T-DM1 versus H in patients with residual invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus HER2-targeted therapy. Here we report exploratory analyses of the relationship between invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and biomarkers potentially related to response. Methods: Formalin fixed paraffin-embedded tissue samples were collected before neoadjuvant treatment and/or at surgery. Surgical samples were used for analyses, except when only pre-treatment samples were available (~20% of cases). DNA was derived to identify PIK3CA hotspot mutations and gene expression (RNA) analysis was used to detect HER2, PD-L1, CD8 and predefined immune signatures including 3-gene, 5-gene, Teffector, chemokine signaling, and checkpoint inhibitor signatures. RNA analysis was adjusted for tumor content and expression levels were dichotomized at the median into low (≤) and high (>) groups. The effect of treatment and biomarkers on IDFS was assessed. Results: PIK3CA mutation (mut) status was available from 1363 (91.7%) patients. T-DM1 IDFS benefit was independent of PIK3CA mut status (mut: HR 0.54; 95%CI 0.23–0.90; non-mut: HR 0.48; 95%CI 0.35–0.65) and no impact of PIK3CA mut was observed within either treatment arm. Gene expression data were available from 1059 (71.3%) patients. Similar gene expression levels were observed between treatment arms, but, unlike the surgical samples (n = 815), the pre-treatment samples (n = 244) were not representative of the ITT population. Thus, subsequent analyses were based on surgical samples (H n = 398; T-DM1 n = 417). Consistent treatment benefit with T-DM1 vs H was observed across the single-gene and immune gene-signature subgroups as in the ITT population. High vs low HER2 expression was associated with worse outcome (HR 2.02; 95% CI 1.32–3.11) within the H arm, but not within the T-DM1 arm (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.56–1.83). High vs low PD-L1 expression was associated with better outcome within the H arm (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.44–1.00) but not within the T-DM1 arm (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.59–1.87). Similar trends were observed in the checkpoint inhibitor subgroups. Conclusions: These exploratory analyses provide the first data on the relationship between biomarker expression in residual disease after HER2-targeted therapy and outcomes. PIK3CA mut status did not influence outcomes with H or T-DM1. T-DM1 benefit appeared to be independent of all biomarkers assessed. Clinical trial information: NCT01772472 .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations32
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207