Abstract P5-17-03: Breast cancer in young women in Canada: A needs assessment
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Objective: A Needs Assessment was conducted by Rethink Breast Cancer to assess age-related differences in experiences for breast cancer patients. This was the first national survey to identify the needs and current gaps in care for younger breast cancer patients. The report, published in March 2013, provided critical evidence-based information and benchmarks to stakeholders on the associated challenges. The following data supplements the main findings presented at the 2013 SABCS by providing a descriptive overview of the differences in breast cancer experiences between younger (≤45 years of age) and older (>45 years of age) women. Methods: From June to October 2011, an online bilingual (English and French) quantitative survey was open to Canadian women who had a diagnosis of breast cancer (initial or recurrence) in the prior 6 years. The survey focused on their pre-diagnosis, diagnosis, treatment, and post-treatment experiences. 574 women responded to the survey: 372 (65%) aged ≤45 years and 202 aged >45 years. The differences in responses between the younger and older respondents was analyzed using the Pearson's Chi-Square test (α = 0.05). Results: Finding a lump (64.3 vs 39.6%; p <.01) and experiencing pain or discomfort in the breast (24.5 vs 14.4%; p <.01) were significantly more likely to cause concerns in younger women. Older women were significantly more likely to be concerned by results from a screening test/mammogram (45.0 vs 8.1%; p <.01). It is plausible that younger women do not receive mammograms as often as their older counterparts. Of the 319 women that found a lump, self-examination (38.6%) was the most frequent method of discovery. However, this was significantly more likely among older rather than younger women (51.3 vs 34.3%; p = 0.02). Follow-up appointments for future reassessment were significantly more likely to be scheduled with younger rather than older women (15.1 vs 5.0%; p = 0.02). With respect to treatment, younger women were significantly more likely than older women to be recommended chemotherapy (81.7 vs 67.3%; p <.01), targeted therapy (21.0 vs 10.9%; p <.01), bilateral mastectomy (17.2 vs 8.9%; p <.01), breast reconstruction (30.9 vs 14.4%; p <.01), node dissection (37.9 vs 23.3%; p <.01), oophorectomy (10.8 vs 5.0%; p = 0.02), and hysterectomy (7.8 vs 2.0%; p <.01). Transitioning from regular to occasional monitoring by a healthcare team was reported to be very or somewhat difficult (59.1 vs 41.8%; p <.01) for younger instead of older women, while older women were significantly more likely to report little to no difficulty with this transition (58.2 vs 40.9%; p <.01). Conclusions: The Needs Assessment demonstrated significant age-related differences in almost all aspects of breast cancer care, including during pre-diagnosis, treatment, and post-treatment. Differences such as greater recommendations for more aggressive treatments and difficulty in care transitions may lead to challenges being faced by younger women relative to their older counterparts. Tools such as checklists and guidelines may assist healthcare teams in meeting the needs of younger women. Future studies are warranted to assess the impact of such tools in helping improve patient education, advocacy, and support programs for this population. Citation Format: DeCoteau MJ, Mercado MG, Ginsberg S, Dhir V, Brezden-Masley C. Breast cancer in young women in Canada: A needs assessment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-17-03.
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 | 0,004 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».