MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415306169 · doi:10.1016/j.ctarc.2025.101021

Retrospective database analysis to assess treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization in metastatic or recurrent HER2-positive breast cancer in Alberta

2025· article· en· W4415306169 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert B. Basmadjian, Winson Y. Cheung, Devon J. Boyne, Jan‐Willem Henning, Daniel Moldaver, Simran Shokar, Chantelle Carbonell, Darren R. Brenner

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Treatment and Research Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsAstraZeneca (Canada)Alberta Cancer FoundationUniversity of CalgaryFoothills Medical Centre
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsMetastatic breast cancerBreast cancerRecurrent breast cancerHealth careMedical diagnosisRetrospective cohort studyCancer treatment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Population-based data from real-world sources on metastatic breast cancer (mBC) patient outcomes by HER2 status are limited, particularly in Canada. To meet this need, we examined treatment patterns, outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization in HER2-positive (HER2+) mBC in a real-world Canadian setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort consisted of all patients in Alberta, Canada diagnosed with de novo metastatic or recurrent HER2+ breast cancer between 2010 and 2019. Patient data were obtained from the provincial cancer registry, electronic medical records, and other administrative databases. RESULTS: 758 patients with HER2+ mBC were included, of which 461 (60.8 %) were recurrent cases. Taxane + trastuzumab + pertuzumab was the most frequent (61.7 %) first-line regimen, trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) was the most frequent (74.8 %) second-line regimen, and capecitabine + lapatinib was the most frequent (52.9 %) third-line regimen. Median overall survival from first-, second-, and third-line chemotherapy was 41.9 months (95 % CI: 36.9-51.2), 18.8 months (95 % CI: 15.4-24.3), and 12.9 months (95 % CI: 11.0-16.8), respectively, with no meaningful differences between de novo and recurrent patients. CONCLUSION: Uptake of guideline-recommended regimens in each line of therapy was lower in recurrent patients although survival was similar to de novo patients. These findings highlight the need for consensus on treatment regimens for de novo and recurrent HER2+ patients, effective first-and second-line management, and novel therapies to improve outcomes. MICROABSTRACT Our study evaluated real-world treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and healthcare utilization in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in Alberta, Canada. Among 758 patients, survival was similar between new diagnoses and recurrent cases, despite lower uptake of guideline-recommended therapies in recurrent patients. Our findings highlight the need for consensus on treatment strategies and novel therapies to improve mBC outcomes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.375
GPT teacher head0.596
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Treatment and Research CommunicationsSame topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207