Trastuzumab (T) and docetaxel (D) for the treatment of HER2 metastatic breast cancer (MBC): A literature based (LB) and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis (MA) of phase II trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
706 Background: Phase II studies of T with D have demonstrated encouraging response rates in women with HER2/neu overexpressing (HER2+) MBC. Because there are no studies comparing this combination to the efficacy of the well-studied combination of Paclitaxel (P) and T, we undertook a MA to obtain a summary estimate of the response rate and toxicity, and to derive aggregate measures of other efficacy parameters. Methods: The project was designed in 2 phases: An LBMA and an IPDMA. Studies were included in the LBMA if they were prospective clinical trials of D + T in women with HER2+ MBC containing ≥ 10 patients. Studies were identified by an electronic literature search of 8 medical databases (Medline and Premedline, Embase, Cancerlit, CINAHL, Biological Abstracts, HealthStar, ACP Journal Club, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) for the years 1966–2002 using the following criteria; “trastuzuamab”, “herceptin”, “docetaxel” and “taxotere”. This was supplemented by hand searches of abstracts from proceedings of the European Society of Medical Oncology, American Society for Clinical Oncology and San Antonio Breast Cancer meetings for the years 1995 - 2002. Summary estimates of the objective response rates (OR) (intent to treat) were obtained using methods described by Laird and Mosteller (Int J Technol Assess in Health Care 6:5–30, 1990) for random effects adjustment.Results: 7 phase II trials with a total of 165 patients were identified. The overall estimated response rate was 60% (95% CI 52%–68%). Major grade 3/4 toxicities are presented. The IPDMA is currently underway and is to be completed in the spring of 2004. Conclusions: Results of the LBMA and IPDMA will be presented and their clinical implication discussed in light of known outcome with P + T and subsequent clinical implications. Author Disclosure Employment or Leadership Consultant or Advisory Stock Ownership Honoraria Research Funding Expert Testimony Other Remuneration Aventis; Roche Canada
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 | 0.035 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.048 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".