MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409318045 · doi:10.1200/po-24-00742

<i>BRCA1/2</i> and Other Predisposition Genes in High-Risk Hormone Receptor+/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2– Breast Cancer Treated With Endocrine Therapy With or Without Palbociclib: A Secondary PENELOPE-B Study Analysis

2025· article· en· W4409318045 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Hahnen, Jan Hauke, Karen A. Gelmon, Frederik Marmé, Corinna Ernst, Miguel Martín, Michael Untch, Hervé Bonnefoi, Erik S. Knudsen, Seock‐Ah Im, Angela DeMichele, Laura van ‘t Veer, Sung‐Bae Kim, Harry D. Bear, Nicole McCarthy, Kerstin Rhiem, Nicholas C. Turner, Agnieszka K. Witkiewicz, Federico Rojo, Martin Filipits, Lesley‐Ann Martin, Peter A. Fasching, Christian Schem, Kerstin Becker, José A. García-Sáenz, Catherine M. Kelly, Toralf Reimer, Masakazu Toi, Hope S. Rugo, Carsten Denkert, Michael Gnant, Andreas Makris, Yuan Liu, Olga Valota, Bärbel Felder, Karsten E. Weber, Valentina Nekljudova, Sibylle Loibl

Bibliographic record

VenueJCO Precision Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalbociclibOncologyBreast cancerMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioCancerHormone receptorPlaceboMetastatic breast cancerConfidence intervalPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE The PENELOPE-B trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01864746 ) recruited patients with hormone receptor+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2– early breast cancer without a pathological complete response after taxane-containing neoadjuvant chemotherapy and at a high risk of relapse. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 13 cycles of palbociclib once daily or placebo on days 1-21 in a 28-day cycle in addition to endocrine therapy (ET). PENELOPE-B did not show improved invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) after adding palbociclib to ET. This retrospective analysis investigated the impact of germline pathogenic variant (PV) status of BRCA1/2 and non- BRCA1/2 cancer predisposition genes on the outcomes of PENELOPE-B trial patients. METHODS In total, 445 patients were sampled following a case-cohort design and 442 were analyzed for germline PVs. Statistical analyses were performed for time-to-event end points (iDFS, distant disease-free survival [DDFS], and overall survival [OS]). RESULTS Of the 442 patients, 42 carried PVs in any cancer predisposition gene; 15 carried BRCA1/2 PVs. Irrespective of the treatment arms, PV status was not a prognostic factor. Regarding the treatment arms in BRCA1/2 PV carriers, numerically better 3-year outcomes were observed in the palbociclib arm (iDFS, 95%; DDFS, 95%; OS, 100%) than in the placebo arm (iDFS, 72.8%; DDFS, 72.8%; OS, 87.5%; hazard ratios palbociclib v placebo 0.349 [iDFS] and 0.562 [DDFS], not calculated for OS, too few events). In patients without BRCA1/2 PVs, the differences in 3-year outcomes were negligible. PVs in non- BRCA1/2 cancer predisposition genes did not influence the efficacy of palbociclib, although gene-specific effects could not be excluded. CONCLUSION Patients with BRCA1/2 PVs had numerically better outcomes after palbociclib. However, the number of BRCA1/2 carriers was small. Larger randomized clinical trials should consider the PV status to further evaluate whether BRCA1/2 PV carriers benefit from cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor treatment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJCO Precision OncologySame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207