MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract PS4-26: Impact of TAILORx data on chemotherapy prescribing in British Columbia

2021· article· en· W3133034676 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Megan E. Tesch, Caroline Speers, Rekha M. Diocee, Alan Nichol, Caroline Lohrisch

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple and Secondary Primary Cancers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerCohortInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyCancerOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Developed with retrospective data, the 21-gene recurrence score assay (RS) reduces adjuvant chemotherapy (CTx) use in hormone-positive (HR+), HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer, justifying the assay’s cost. The TAILORx trial prospectively confirmed the predictive value of RS and established thresholds for CTx benefit in younger and older patients. We examined CTx use in British Columbia (BC) following TAILORx publication, as a prelude to exploring age-adjusted cost effectiveness of the assay. Methods: We assembled 3 cohorts of patients with HR+, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer: diagnosed before RS funding (cohort 1: January 1, 2013-December 31, 2013), after introduction of public funding (cohort 2: July 1, 2015-June 30, 2016), and after TAILORx results (cohort 3: July 1, 2018-June 30, 2019). Patients aged 18-80 years with tumors that were grade 3, grade 2 T1b or larger, or any T size and grade if ≤ 40 years of age were included, matching BC funding criteria. Previous in situ or invasive breast cancer cases were excluded. CTx use by age and RS was compared between cohorts using univariate analyses. Results: 2,066 patients met inclusion criteria (Table 1). CTx use in cohorts 1, 2, and 3 was 21%, 17%, and 13%, respectively. In cohorts 2 plus 3, CTx use was 30% for patients up to 50 years of age and 11% for patients over 50 years of age. Baseline characteristics were balanced, except grade 3 histology (24%, 25%, 17% in cohorts 1, 2, 3, respectively; p=0.01). RS was ≥ 26 in 33% of grade 3 and 34% of PR negative tumors. CTx use declined by 19% after RS funding was introduced and by another 23% after TAILORx publication (p=0.001). Reduction in CTx use was significant for RS 11-20 tumors (cohort 3 vs. 2, p=0.004). A 7.5% nonsignificant increase in CTx was seen for RS 26-30 tumors (cohort 2 vs. 3, p=0.55). There was no significant change in CTx use in patients aged > 50 years (12% in cohort 2 vs. 10% in cohort 3, p=0.22). Among patients aged 70-80 years in cohort 3 with RS, 5% had RS ≥ 26, and of these, 40% had CTx (9% of patients in this age group), compared with 92% CTx use for patients aged ≤ 50 years with RS ≥ 26 (15% of patients in this age group). Conclusions: CTx use decreased after TAILORx publication, particularly for RS 11-20 tumors. CTx use changed less in patients over 50 years old, suggesting that trial results confirmed pre-existing prescribing practices. CTx use increased in patients with RS 26-30 tumors, reflecting acceptance of the new threshold for CTx benefit established by TAILORx. CTx use was low overall in patients aged > 50 years, especially in those aged 70-80 years, in part due to the very low frequency of high RS tumors. Given these findings, we conclude that cost effectiveness modelling for publicly funded RS should take age into consideration. Table 1: Receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (CTx) by 21-gene recurrence score (RS) result before assay availability (cohort 1), after assay availability (cohort 2), and after TAILORx publication (cohort 3) in patients (pts) aged ≤ 50 (a) and 51-80 years (b).a)Age≤ 50, n = 423Cohort123No. of pts who received CTx / No. of pts in group (%)RS not done51/105 (48.6)28/56 (50)1/6 (16.7)RS ≤ 101/5 (20.0)0/17 (0)1/25 (4.0)RS 11-201/8 (12.5)4/52 (7.7)2/67 (3.0)RS 21-251/3 (33.3)8/17 (47.1)10/20 (50.0)RS 26-300/0 (0)5/5 (100)5/5 (100)RS ≥ 312/2 (100)10/11 (90.9)17/19 (89.5)Entire cohort56/123 (45.5)55/158 (34.8)36/142 (25.4)b)Age51-80, n = 1643Cohort123No. of pts who received CTx / No. of pts in group (%)RS not done72/494 (14.6)25/279 (9.0)2/86 (2.3)RS ≤ 100/6 (0)0/60 (0)0/110 (0)RS 11-202/11 (18.2)5/126 (4.0)0/198 (0)RS 21-252/5 (40.0)6/56 (10.7)2/64 (3.1)RS 26-302/3 (66.7)5/20 (25.0)14/35 (40.0)RS ≥ 312/2 (100)31/40 (77.5)37/48 (77.1)Entire cohort80/521 (15.4)72/581 (12.4)55/541 (10.2) Citation Format: Megan Tesch, Caroline Speers, Rekha Manhas Diocee, Alan Nichol, Caroline Lohrisch. Impact of TAILORx data on chemotherapy prescribing in British Columbia [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 PS4-26.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.701
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicMultiple and Secondary Primary CancersFrench-language works237,207