MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414874657 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32100559

Oncotype DX Recurrence Score Predicts Survival in Invasive Micropapillary Breast Carcinoma: A National Cancer Database Analysis

2025· article· en· W4414874657 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Kazmi, Kyle Chang, Waqar Haque, Efstathia Polychronopoulou, Jonathon Cummock, Sandra S. Hatch, Andrew Farach, Upendra Parvathaneni, E. Brian Butler, Bin S. Teh

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate analysisCohortProportional hazards modelBreast cancerStage (stratigraphy)CancerOverall survivalComorbidityMultivariate statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: Invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) is a rare, aggressive breast cancer subtype marked by high lymph node metastasis rates. While Oncotype DX recurrence score (RS) offers prognostic information for patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer, its utility in IMPC—a histology with distinct biologic behavior—remains unvalidated. This study evaluates whether Oncotype DX offers prognostic information with respect to overall survival (OS) in non-metastatic, early-stage patients with IMPC of the breast. (2) Methods: The National Cancer Database (2004–2020) was queried to select for women with ER+/HER2−, T1-T2N0-N1 IMPC who underwent Oncotype DX testing and received no neoadjuvant therapy. Patients were stratified by RS: low (≤11), intermediate (12–25), and high (>25). Kaplan–Meier survival curves and log-rank tests compared 5-year OS between groups. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models assessed RS as an independent predictor, adjusting for age, race, comorbidities, grade, radiation, and insurance status. (3) Results: A total of 1325 women met the selection criteria. The cohort demonstrated significant survival disparities by RS (log-rank p = 0.017). Five-year OS rates were 97.5%, 97.5%, and 93.7% for low, intermediate, and high-risk patients, respectively. Adjusted multivariate analysis confirmed RS as an independent prognosticator: low (HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15–0.75) and intermediate (HR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.15–0.75) scores correlated with reduced mortality versus high RS. Omission of radiation therapy (HR = 2.68, 95% CI: 1.05–6.86) and higher comorbidity burden (0 comorbidities vs. ≥2: HR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.10–0.61) were significantly associated with worse survival. (4) Conclusions: Oncotype DX is predictive for OS in IMPC, with high RS (>25) portending poorer outcomes. The survival detriment associated with RT omission aligns with prior studies demonstrating RT benefit in higher-risk cohorts. These findings validate RS as a prognostic tool in IMPC and underscore its potential to refine adjuvant therapy, particularly RT utilization. Future studies should explore RS-driven treatment personalization in IMPC, including comorbidity management and adjuvant radiation to improve outcomes in this distinct patient population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→