MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400917644 · doi:10.1056/evidoa2300267

Clinical and Genomic Risk for Late Breast Cancer Recurrence and Survival

2024· review· en· W4400917644 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph A. Sparano, Michael Crager, Robert J. Gray, Guping Tang, Jess Hoag, Frederick L. Baehner, Steven Shak, Della Makower, Kathy S. Albain, Daniel F. Hayes, Charles E. Geyer, Elizabeth Claire Dees, Matthew P. Goetz, John A. Olson, Tracy Lively, Sunil Badve, Thomas J. Saphner, Timothy J. Whelan, Virginia Kaklamani, Norman Wolmark, George W. Sledge, Salomon M. Stemmer

Bibliographic record

VenueNEJM Evidence · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBreast cancerMedicineOncologyCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay (Oncotype DX) is used to guide adjuvant chemotherapy use for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2)-negative, axillary node-negative breast cancer. Its role, however, in providing prognostic information for late distant recurrence when added to clinicopathologic prognostic factors is unknown. METHODS: A patient-specific meta-analysis including 10,004 women enrolled in three trials was updated using extended follow-up data from TAILORx, integrating the RS with histologic grade, tumor size, and age at surgery for the RSClin tool. Cox models integrating clinicopathologic factors and the RS were compared by using likelihood ratio (LR) tests. External validation of prognosis for distant recurrence in years 0 to 10 and 5 to 10 was performed in an independent cohort of 1098 women in a real-world registry. RESULTS: RSClin provided significantly more prognostic information than either the clinicopathologic factors (ΔLR chi-square, 86.2; P<0.001) or RS alone (ΔLR chi-square, 131.0; P<0.001). The model was prognostic in an independent cohort for distant recurrence by 10 years after diagnosis (standardized hazard ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.25 to 1.94), was associated with late distant recurrence risk between 5 and 10 years after diagnosis (standardized hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.25 to 2.55), and approximated the observed 10-year distant recurrence risk (Lin concordance, 0.87) and 5- to 10-year distant recurrence risk (Lin concordance, 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: The 21-gene RS is prognostic for distant recurrence and overall survival in early breast cancer. A model integrating the 21-gene RS and clinicopathologic factors improved estimates of distant recurrence risk compared with either used individually and stratified late distant recurrence risk. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health [U10CA180820, U10CA180794, UG1CA189859, U10CA180868, and U10CA180822] and others.).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNEJM EvidenceSame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207