Correlation of serum anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels on identification of premenopausal patients (pts) with hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2-negative, node-positive breast cancer most likely to benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in SWOG S1007 (RxPONDER).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
505 Background: SWOG S1007 was a phase 3 randomized trial to evaluate the benefit of endocrine therapy alone (ET) or with chemotherapy (CET) in pts with HR+/HER2- invasive breast cancer with recurrence score (RS) ≤ 25. There was no invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) benefit for CET compared to ET in postmenopausal women However, in premenopausal women CET had an IDFS improvement compared to ET (HR=0.60; 95% 0.43-0.83). The objective was to further refine patient subgroups who benefit from CET, we measured baseline hormone levels in S1007 pts to quantify their menstrual status by serum hormone levels and associated clinical outcomes. Methods: Serum estradiol (E), progesterone (P), follicular stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), and inhibin B (IB) were assessed on baseline serum samples from 1,015 pts who self-reported being premenopausal and age < 55. Magnetic fluorescent bead-based immunoassays ( i.e., Luminex assays) or colorimetric ELISAs were performed at the Biomarker Discovery Laboratory at the University of Kansas Medical Center to measure hormone levels. Associations of the markers (both continuous and dichotomized) with IDFS and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) were tested for prognosis and prediction of CET benefit using Cox regression. Results: Single baseline measurement of IB, P, E, LH, FSH, or combination of E/LH/FSH, was not prognostic for IDFS or predictive for chemotherapy benefit. However, AMH levels (≥10 pg/mL) showed significant interaction with chemotherapy benefit (p=0.019), and risk increased with continuous AMH with ET alone, but not CET (p=0.03). Compared to ET alone, CET was beneficial in the 79% of premenopausal patients with AMH levels ≥10 pg/mL, a standard cutoff to define normal ovarian reserve (HR=0.48; 95% 0.33-0.69, adjusting for RS). CET was not beneficial in the 21% with AMH < 10 (HR=1.21; 95% 0.60-2.43). Absolute 5-year IDFS benefit of CET for RS ≤ 25 was 7.8% (95.2%-87.4%) for AMH ≥ 10 vs. -1.7% (89.1%-90.8%) for AMH < 10. DRFS showed a similar pattern with CET benefit in AMH ≥10 pg/mL (5-year DRFS benefit: 4.4%; HR=0.41; 95% 0.25-0.68, adjusting for RS) and no benefit in AMH < 10 (5-year DRFS benefit: -0.9%, HR=1.50; 95% 0.62-3.63). Conclusions: Among self-reported premenopausal patients < age 55, pts with baseline serum AMH levels ≥10 pg/mL showed significant benefit from CET compared to patients with AMH levels <10 pg/mL. AMH levels were a better indicator of CET benefit than self-reported menopause status, age, or E/LH/FSH levels. Use of AMH-based selection of patients may inform who most benefits from the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy to ET. Clinical trial information: NCT01272037 .
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".