The TRAR gene classifier to predict response to neoadjuvant therapy in HER2‐positive and ER‐positive breast cancer patients: an explorative analysis from the NeoSphere trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As most erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer (BC) patients currently receive dual HER2-targeting added to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, improved methods for identifying individual response, and assisting postsurgical salvage therapy, are needed. Herein, we evaluated the 41-gene classifier trastuzumab advantage risk model (TRAR) as a predictive marker for patients enrolled in the NeoSphere trial. TRAR scores were computed from RNA of 350 pre- and 166 post-treatment tumor specimens. Overall, TRAR score was significantly associated with pathological complete response (pCR) rate independently of other predictive clinico-pathological variables. Separate analyses according to estrogen receptor (ER) status showed a significant association between TRAR score and pCR in ER-positive specimens but not in ER-negative counterparts. Among ER-positive BC patients not achieving a pCR, those with TRAR-low scores in surgical specimens showed a trend for lower distant event-free survival. In conclusion, in HER2-positive/ER-positive BC, TRAR is an independent predictor of pCR and represents a promising tool to select patients responsive to anti-HER2-based neoadjuvant therapy and to assist treatment escalation and de-escalation strategies in this setting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".