MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409713352 · doi:10.1002/ijc.35448

Real‐world comparative effectiveness and safety of Pertuzumab in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer: A pan‐Canadian population‐based cohort study

2025· article· en· W4409713352 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Caroline E. Muñoz, Wei Fang Dai, Winson Y. Cheung, Claire de Oliveira, Reka Pataky, Philip Q. Ding, David Tran, Zeb Aurangzeb, Chenthila Nagamuthu, Ning Liu, Lynn Lethbridge, Carol McClure, K.A. Vriends, Hui Xiong, Chris Folkins, Chandy Somayaji, Stuart Peacock, Riaz Alvi, Donna Turner, Carrie O’Conaill, Ted McDonald, Robin Urquhart, Cynthia Kendell, Jeff Dowden, Erin Strumpf, Avram Denburg, Jaclyn Beca, Rebecca E. Mercer, Mina Tadrous, Pam Takhar, Kelvin Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cancer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreMcGill UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of New BrunswickDalhousie UniversityNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health ResearchOmniActive Health Technologies (Canada)University of ManitobaGovernment of ManitobaCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of CalgaryHealth Sciences CentreCancerCare ManitobaSaskatchewan Cancer AgencyCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlUniversity of TorontoPublic Health Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPertuzumabMedicineInternal medicinePropensity score matchingFebrile neutropeniaMetastatic breast cancerTrastuzumabPopulationBreast cancerIncidence (geometry)Cumulative incidenceCohortCancerChemotherapyOncologySurgeryNeutropenia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assessed the comparative effectiveness and safety of pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy versus trastuzumab and chemotherapy for patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in Canada. We conducted a population-based retrospective study of patients receiving first-line treatment for mBC across eight Canadian provinces. Patients receiving trastuzumab and chemotherapy were historical comparators, and patients receiving pertuzumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy were the treatment group. Patients were followed until death or up to 5 years following the start of treatment (maximum follow-up to December 31, 2019). The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). One-year cumulative incidence and RDs were calculated for safety outcomes including hospitalization, emergency department visits, febrile neutropenia, and cardiac-related events. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse-probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were applied within provinces. Individual provincial survival estimates were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. 3063 patients who received first-line treatment for mBC were identified. Median OS was higher among treatment patients compared to comparator patients in most provinces. Pertuzumab was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk of mortality (pooled HRs, PSM: 0.65, 95%CI: 0.57-0.74; IPTW: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.61-0.70). The treatment group had a lower risk of hospitalization compared to the comparator group (pooled RD: -0.05, 95% CI: [-0.09]-[-0.01]). No difference in 1-year cumulative incidence of cardiac-related events was identified between groups. Pertuzumab use in practice was associated with statistically significant improved survival without apparent safety concerns among patients with mBC. Real-world evaluations allow for assessments of publicly funded treatments to inform funding policies.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of CancerSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207