MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310184950 · doi:10.3390/jcm11236987

Expression of c-MET in Estrogen Receptor Positive and HER2 Negative Resected Breast Cancer Correlated with a Poor Prognosis

2022· article· en· W4310184950 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Iovino, Anna Diana, Francesca Carlino, Franca Ferraraccio, Giuliano Antoniol, Francesca Fisone, A. Perrone, Federica Zito Marino, Iacopo Panarese, Madhura S. Tathode, Michele Caraglia, Gianluca Gatta, Roberto Ruggiero, Simona Parisi, Ferdinando De Vita, Fortunato Ciardiello, Ludovico Docimo, Michele Orditura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Cells and Metastasis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerInternal medicineOncologyProportional hazards modelEstrogen receptorUnivariate analysisMultivariate analysisProgesterone receptorCancerEstrogenCohortStage (stratigraphy)Gynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (c-MET) receptor is overexpressed in about 14−54% of invasive breast cancers, but its prognostic value in clinical practice is still unclear. Methods: In order to investigate the relationship between c-MET expression levels and prognosis, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical features and outcomes of 105 women with estrogen receptor positive HER2 negative (ER+/HER2-) resected breast cancer. We used the Kaplan Meier method to estimate Disease Free Survival (DFS) and Breast Cancer Specific Survival (BCSS) in the subgroups of patients with high (≥50%) and low (<50%) c-MET expression. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional regression models were performed to assess the prognostic impact of clinicopathological parameters for DFS an BCSS. Results: High c-MET values significantly correlated with tumor size, high Ki67 and low (<20%) progesterone receptor expression. At a median follow up of 60 months, patients with high c-MET tumor had significantly worse (p = 0.00026) and BCSS (p = 0.0013). Univariate analysis showed a significant association between large tumor size, elevated Ki67, c-MET values and increased risk of recurrence or death. The multivariate COX regression model showed that tumor size and high c-MET expression were independent predictors of DFS (p = 0.019 and p = 0.022). Moreover, large tumor size was associated with significantly higher risk of cancer related death at multivariate analysis (p = 0.017), while a trend towards a poorer survival was registered in the high c-MET levels cohort (p = 0.084). Conclusions: In our series, high c-MET expression correlated with poor survival outcomes. Further studies are warranted to validate the clinical relevance and applicability of c-MET as a prognostic factor in ER+/HER2- early BC.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicCancer Cells and MetastasisFrench-language works237,207