MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of real-world outcomes over time in a large population-based cohort of patients with metastatic breast cancer.

2023· article· en· W4379285819 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yi Xu, Caroline Speers, Lovedeep Gondara, Alan Nichol, Caroline Lohrisch, Nathalie LeVasseur, Stephen Chia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetastatic breast cancerProportional hazards modelOncologyBreast cancerInternal medicineCohortPopulationCancerLog-rank testDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e13112 Background: The treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) has evolved over the past two decades, with a number of new therapeutics being introduced. Real-world evidence is needed to evaluate whether these new therapeutics have made an impact on population survival, as improvements in survival seen within clinical trials do not necessarily translate into the real world. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether survival for each subtype of MBC has improved in patients diagnosed with MBC between 2003 and 2017. In addition, for the HER2+ subtype, we aimed to characterize and correlate changes in the use of anti-HER2 therapeutics with any observed real-world survival changes. Methods: The study included residents of British Columbia, Canada who were diagnosed with de novo or recurrent MBC during one of the following four time periods: 2003 to 2005, 2007 to 2009, 2011 to 2013, and 2014 to 2017. Patients were included whether or not they received any systemic therapies for MBC. Patient, disease, and treatment characteristics were obtained through medical records and the Breast Cancer Outcomes Unit database. Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariable analyses were performed using the log-rank test, and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: 5,924 patients were diagnosed with MBC during one of the four time periods. 3,756 (63%) had hormone receptor positive (HR+) subtype, 1,145 (19%) had HER2+ subtype, 770 (13%) had triple negative (TN) subtype, and 253 (4%) had unknown subtype. For the HR+ subtype, overall survival (OS) was similar for cohorts 1 to 3 (median survivals: 751 days, 704 days, and 702 days). However, OS was longer for cohort 4 (median survival: 855 days) compared to cohort 3 ( p < 0.001). For the HER2+ subtype, OS was similar for cohorts 1 to 3 (median survivals: 594 days, 511 days, and 592 days). However, OS was longer for cohort 4 (median survival: 791 days) compared to cohort 3 ( p = 0.03). For the TN subtype, there was no significant change in OS for the four cohorts (median survivals: 234 days, 236 days, 274 days, and 255 days). On MVA, younger age, non-TN subtype, time cohort 4, de novo presentation, and disease-free interval of > 12 months were associated with improved OS. For the HER2+ subtype, a greater percentage of patients in the later cohorts were treated with pertuzumab ( p < 0.001) and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) ( p < 0.001), with 12.4% and 36.3% respectively receiving these drugs in cohort 3 compared to 80.9% and 52.5% respectively in cohort 4. Conclusions: Patients diagnosed with MBC of the HR+ or HER2+ subtypes in the 2014 to 2017 time period had improved real-world outcomes compared to those diagnosed in earlier time periods. Improvements in real-world outcomes were likely associated with new therapeutic agents with demonstrated OS benefit in trial settings.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.426 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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