Phase II randomized trial comparing metronomic anthracycline-containing chemotherapy versus standard schedule in untreated HER2 negative advanced breast cancer: activity and quality of life results of the GOIM 21003 trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Optimizing chemotherapy to achieve disease and symptoms control is a noteworthy purpose in advanced breast cancer (ABC). We reported the activity and quality of life of a phase II study, comparing metronomic regimen with standard schedule as first line chemotherapy for ABC. METHODS: Patients with HER2 negative ABC were randomized to non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD, 60 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) and cyclophosphamide (CTX, 600 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) (Arm A) or NPLD (20 mg/m2 day, on day 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks) and metronomic daily oral CTX 50 mg (ARM B). Primary end-points were overall response rate (ORR) and quality of life, secondary progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity. RESULTS: From August 2012 to December 2017, 121 patients were enrolled, 105 evaluable. Median follow-up was 21.3 months. Most patients had hormone receptor positive. ORR was 43 % in arm A and 50 % in arm B. Median PFS was 8.9 months in arm A and 6,4 months in arm B. There was no difference in OS. Total score was not clinically different between the two arms. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in 12 patients and 16 patients respectively; alopecia G2 in 41 % (77 %) vs 14 (27 %) in arm A and in arm B respectively. One cardiac toxicity was observed (arm A). CONCLUSIONS: First line metronomic chemotherapy for HER2 negative ABC had similar clinical activity and quite better tolerability than standard schedule and could be considered a further treatment option when chemotherapy is indicated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".