Abstract P5-10-23: Frequency and Cost of Chemotherapy-Related Serious Adverse Effects in a Canadian Population Sample of Women with Estrogen and/or Progesterone Receptor Positive Early Stage Breast Cancer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Chemotherapy-related serious adverse effects (CSAE) reported by clinical trials of chemotherapy and by population-based assessments of CSAE in breast cancer populations with different clinicopathological characteristics may not reflect the experiences of women with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor positive (ER+/PR+) early stage breast cancer (ESBC). We aimed to characterize the risks and economic impact of CSAE among women in the Canadian general population treated with chemotherapy for ER+/PR+ ESBC. Methods: We used the Manitoba Cancer Registry to identify all women (n=665) diagnosed with ER+/PR+ ESBC during the period from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2002. One-year of follow-up information from diagnosis, including hospitalizations and emergency room visits for all adverse effects that are typically related to chemotherapy, were identified by linking with Manitoba Administrative Databases including the Hospital Discharge Database and the Physician Claims Database. 251 women received chemotherapy during the 12 months after the initial diagnosis with ESBC. Hospitalizations or emergency room visits for CSAE and health care expenditures were compared between women who did and did not receive chemotherapy. We assessed the effect of chemotherapy on rate of CSAE using logistic regression, adjusting for menopausal status, lymph node status, anthracycline-containing chemotherapy agents, and comorbid indices. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Women who received chemotherapy were more likely than those who did not to be hospitalized or visit an emergency room for CSAE (2.6% versus 9%, mean difference =6.4%, 95% CI=3.5% to 10%, p=0.01). In a logistic regression analysis, the rate of CSAE was found to be significantly greater for women with post-menopausal status (post-versus pre-menopausal, odds ratio 2.4; CI= 1.7 to 2.8) and 1-3 lymph node positive (LN+) (0 versus 1-3 LN+, odds ratio, 3.1; CI= 2.5 to 3.6). Chemotherapy recipients incurred large incremental expenditures for CSAE (pre-menopausal LN-: $1100 per person per year; post-menopausal LN-: $1600 per person per year; post-menopausal 1-3 LN+: $2200 per person per year). Conclusions: The impact and costs of CSAE among ER+/PR+ ESBC are larger than predicted from clinical data and vary significantly by lymph node and menopausal status. Our findings, when combined with recent population-based data suggesting that women with ER+/PR+ ESBC may not gain benefit from chemotherapy as much as reported in clinical trials, have important implications for quality of life and could affect decisions regarding the use of chemotherapy in these patients. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-10-23.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».