Value of a 21-gene expression assay on core biopsy to predict neoadjuvant chemotherapy response in breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A recurrence score based on a 21-gene expression assay predicts the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. This systematic review aimed to determine whether the 21-gene expression assay performed on core biopsy at diagnosis predicted pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: The study was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant databases were searched to identify studies assessing the value of the 21-gene expression assay recurrence score in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of the studies. Results are reported as risk ratio (RR) with 95 per cent confidence interval using the Cochrane-Mantel-Haenszel method for meta-analysis. Sensitivity analyses were carried out where appropriate. RESULTS: Seven studies involving 1744 patients reported the correlation between pretreatment recurrence score and pCR. Of these, 777 patients (44.6 per cent) had a high recurrence score and 967 (55.4 per cent) a low-intermediate score. A pCR was achieved in 94 patients (5.4 per cent). The pCR rate was significantly higher in the group with a high recurrence score than in the group with a low-intermediate score (10.9 versus 1.1 per cent; RR 4.47, 95 per cent c.i. 2.76 to 7.21; P < 0.001). A significant risk difference was observed between the two groups (risk difference 0.10, 0.04 to 0.15; P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A high recurrence score is associated with higher pCR rates and a low-intermediate recurrence score may indicate chemoresistance. Routine assessment of recurrence score by the 21-gene expression assay on core biopsy might be of value when considering neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".