MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract PS4-27: A prospective multicenter study evaluating the impact of the 21-Gene Breast Recurrence Score® upon physician treatment decision and cost in lymph node-positive breast cancer patients in Quebec

2021· article· en· W3131204198 on OpenAlexaffabout
Saima Hassan, Rami Younan, Érica Patocskai, Louise Provencher, Brigitte Poirier, Lucas Sidéris, Pierre Dubé, Jean-François Boileau, Catalin Mihalcioiu, André Robidoux

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreJewish General HospitalUniversité LavalHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineProspective cohort studyClinical endpointOncologyCohortLymph nodeChemotherapyCancerCohort studyObservational studyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Locoregional lymph node involvement has historically been used as the most important deciding factor for the administration of chemotherapy in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer patients. The 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score® assay (the assay) is emerging as an important tool to assist with chemotherapy decisions amongst hormone receptor (HR)-positive, node-positive breast cancer (BC) patients. Previous studies have suggested that node-positive patients with low Recurrence Score (RS) results do not benefit from chemotherapy. We wanted to better understand the impact of the assay upon physician treatment decisions and treatment cost in this patient cohort. Methods: We conducted a multicenter prospective observational trial for ER/PR-positive HER2-negative BC patients that have undergone surgical treatment for T1-T3 disease and 1-3 positive lymph nodes. Physicians were required to complete a questionnaire indicating treatment choice prior to and post availability of Recurrence Score results. Patients were enrolled in the study from the time of consent to 6 months after the start of adjuvant therapy. The primary endpoint was change in the physician’s recommendation for chemotherapy prior to and post assay results. Secondary endpoints include the change in recommendation for additional growth factor (GF) supportive therapy, change in physician’s expressed level of confidence, and changes in estimated cost of recommended treatments prior to and post assay results. Results: 70 patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2019 at five hospital centers, as part of the McPeak Sirois Group of Quebec. The median age of the cohort was 61 years (range, 38 to 82 years). 18.5% (n=13) of the cohort consisted of patients < 50 years, and 81.4% (n=57) were > or = to 50 years. 64.3% (n=45) of the patients had one positive lymph node and 35.7% (n=25) of the patients had 2 or 3 positive lymph nodes. 25.7% (n=18) of the patients had a RS < 11 and 68.6% (n=48) had a RS result between 11-25. For the entire cohort, we found that the proportion of patients for whom chemo-hormonal therapy was recommended was reduced by an absolute 67.1% by knowledge of the RS result (OR (odds of having chemo-hormonal therapy post-RS recommendation versus pre-RS recommendation) = 0.03 [95% CI: 0.01-0.08]; P<0.0001). The RS results led to an absolute reduction in physician recommendation in chemo-hormonal therapy by 38.5% for patients < 50 years, and by 73.7% of patients (OR=0.02 [95% CI: 0.01-0.06]; P <0.0001) for patients > or = to 50 years. Changes in treatment recommendation were identified for patients with one positive node, 73.3% (OR=0.02 [95% CI: 0.01-0.07]; P<0.0001); and for patients with two or three positive nodes, 56.0% (OR=0.06 [95% CI: 0.02-0.23]; P<0.0001). Recommendations for GF supportive therapy due to RS results decreased by 42.6% (OR=0.16 [95% CI: 0.07-0.34]; P <0.0001). Moreover, RS results led to an increase in confidence in physician treatment decisions for 68.6% of patients (OR=18.3 [95% CI: 7.90-42.28]; P <0.0001). We found that the cost of chemotherapy, in addition to anti-emetics and GF supportive therapy, decreased by 69.9% per patient (pre-RS mean, $3,968 CAN; versus post-RS mean, $1,196 CAN) (P <0.0001). Conclusions: Overall, we found that the 21-gene Breast Recurrence Score® assay changed physician treatment decisions in about two-thirds of all patients with hormone receptor-positive, node-positive BC, regardless of the number of positive nodes (up to 3). The assay increased physician confidence and was associated with an important decrease in treatment cost. Taken together, the assay is a cost-effective approach that can decrease the use of chemotherapy amongst HR-positive, node-positive BC patients in Quebec. Citation Format: Saima Hassan, Rami Younan, Erica Patocskai, Louise Provencher, Brigitte Poirier, Lucas Sideris, Pierre Dubé, Jean-Francois Boileau, Catalin Mihalcioiu, André Robidoux. A prospective multicenter study evaluating the impact of the 21-Gene Breast Recurrence Score® upon physician treatment decision and cost in lymph node-positive breast cancer patients in Quebec [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS4-27.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→