MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Metformin, placebo, and endocrine therapy discontinuation among participants in a randomized double-blind trial of metformin versus placebo in hormone receptor–positive early-stage breast cancer (CCTG MA32).

2022· article· en· W4281660086 on OpenAlexaff
Dawn L. Hershman, Bingshu E. Chen, Wendy R. Parulekar, Julie Lemieux, Jennifer A. Ligibel, Karen A. Gelmon, Timothy J. Whelan, Pamela J. Goodwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMcMaster UniversitySinai Health SystemUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineMetforminPlaceboDiscontinuationInternal medicineBreast cancerCancerInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

526 Background: The MA32 study (NCT01101438) investigated whether 5-years of metformin improves invasive disease-free survival in early-stage breast cancer (BC). Non-adherence to endocrine therapy (ET) and medications for chronic conditions is common, and increases with drug toxicity and polypharmacy. This secondary analysis evaluates rates and predictors of early discontinuation of metformin, placebo, and ET among participants with HR positive BC. Methods: Patients with high-risk non-metastatic BC were randomized to 60 months of metformin (850 mg BID) or placebo. Patients were administered bottles of metformin/placebo every 180 days. Metformin/placebo compliance was defined as a bottle dispensed at month 48 or later (i.e., medication supplied for 54 months). The ET compliance analysis included patients with HR positive BC who received adjuvant ET with start and stop date reported and was defined as > 48 months of use. Associations of baseline covariates with drug compliance and with ET adherence were examined using multivariable models. Results: Among the 2,521 HR-positive BC patients, 32.9% were non-compliant to study drug. Non-compliance was higher among patients on metformin vs. placebo (37.1% vs. 28.7%, p<0.001). Reassuringly, compliance to ET was similar between treatment arms (28.4% vs 28.0%, p=0.86). Patients who were non-compliant to endocrine therapy, were more likely to be non-compliant to study therapy (38.8% vs. 30.1%, p<0.0001). In a multivariable analysis, study drug non-compliance was increased with metformin vs. placebo (OR=1.43, 95% CI, 1.21-1.70; p<0.0001); grade 1 or greater GI toxicity during the first year (70.9% vs. 53.2%; OR=1.20, 95% CI, 1.01-1.44; p=0.044); lower age (age < 50 OR = 1.44, 95% CI, 1.21 – 1.71; p<0.01) and higher body mass index (BMI > 30, OR=1.49, 95% CI, 1.25 - 1.77; p<0.0001). Study drug non-compliance was decreased with prior receipt of chemotherapy (OR = 0.68, 95% CI, 0.50–0.84; p<0.001). Non-compliance with endocrine therapy was associated with increased non-compliance to study drug (OR: 1.47, 95% CI, 1.20, 1.70, p < 0.0001). Study drug (metformin vs placebo) non-compliance was not associated with endocrine therapy non-compliance (OR=0.97, 95% CI, 0.80-1.17; p=0.74). Conclusions: While non-compliance was higher among patients on metformin, it was still considerable among patients on placebo. Among other factors, development of GI toxicity and non-adherence to ET were associated with non-adherence to study drug. Many BC patients on ET are prescribed metformin and other oral medications for the treatment of chronic conditions. Reassuringly, non-adherence to study drug did not impact endocrine therapy adherence. Attention to global medication adherence is needed to improve BC and cardiovascular outcomes in cancer survivors. Clinical trial information: NCT0110143.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.320 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207