MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4311061244 · doi:10.1158/1940-6215.dcis22-pr009

Abstract PR009: Breast cancer (BC) risk reduction in young women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

2022· article· en· W4311061244 sur OpenAlexaff
Megan E. Tesch, Julia S. Wong, Laura S. Dominici, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Rulla Tamini, Lidia Schapira, Virginia F. Borges, Ellen Warner, Steven E. Come, Karen Sepucha, Laura C. Collins, Ann H. Partridge, Shoshana M. Rosenberg

Notice bibliographique

RevueCancer Prevention Research · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Établissements canadiensHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineBreast cancerTamoxifenDuctal carcinomaMastectomyPopulationGynecologyBreast-conserving surgeryInternal medicineCancerCohort

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Young women with DCIS are at increased risk of recurrence and second BC compared to older women and may derive the greatest benefit from risk reduction strategies. Little is known about treatment decision-making, engagement in preventive behaviors, or fear of recurrence among young DCIS survivors. Thus, we sought to investigate treatment and prevention issues in this population. Methods: Using a multicenter prospective cohort that enrolled 1302 women with stage 0-IV BC at age ≤40, we identified participants with DCIS only who completed surveys in the year following diagnosis (dx). Surveys assessed treatment decisions, lifestyle factors (alcohol, smoking, physical activity [PA]), and fear of recurrence (Lasry Scale). Data was summarized with descriptive statistics and groups were compared with Fisher’s exact test. Results: Among 87 patients (median age 38, range 26-40), 75 had available treatment decision data, 19 (25%) of whom had breast-conserving surgery (BCS), 11 (15%) unilateral mastectomy (UM), and 45 (60%) bilateral mastectomy (BM). Most (77%) indicated their doctor said BCS was an option or recommended, including 34 (59%) who had BM. Of 40 patients who reported a patient-driven surgical decision, 73% had BM, 13% UM, and 15% BCS. Among 15 patients who reported the decision as doctor-driven, none had BM, 27% UM, and 73% BCS. Those who had BM were more likely to be extremely confident about the decision (80% vs. 73% UM vs. 53% BCS, p=0.022). Adjuvant tamoxifen was used by 10/27 (37%) patients with ER+ DCIS who had BCS/UM. Most who took tamoxifen reported this decision was shared with their doctor (90%); 1 reported the decision was made on her own. Of the 17 patients who did not take tamoxifen, 88% indicated their doctor said endocrine therapy was an option or recommended. Among all 87 patients, 31 (36%) were former and 3 (4%) were current smokers at baseline assessment (median 5 months post-dx); 51 (59%) never smoked. Overall, 4 quit within 1 year of dx. Most patients (83%) were current drinkers at baseline, though 79% consumed <5 alcoholic beverages/week; 8% reported lower consumption at 1 year. Regarding PA at 1 year, 73% (58/80) reported ≥150 minutes of moderate-intensity PA/week. Overall, 41% of young survivors were at least moderately concerned about their BC coming back, with concern varying numerically by surgery (65% post-BCS, 50% post-UM, 29% post-BM, p=0.053). Conclusions: BC recurrence concerns were frequent among young DCIS patients, particularly among those with remaining breast tissue. BM decisions were largely patient-driven and made with high confidence, reflecting preferences towards surgical prevention. While adherence to survivorship lifestyle guidelines was high, including not smoking, consumption of ≤7 drinks/week, and engaging in PA, tamoxifen use was low, even when offered by a provider. Young DCIS survivors appear motivated to lower future BC risk through surgery and maintenance of healthy behaviors, and less so with tamoxifen; such values should be considered during treatment and survivorship counseling. Citation Format: Megan E. Tesch, Julia S. Wong, Laura Dominici, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Rulla Tamini, Lidia Schapira, Virginia F. Borges, Ellen Warner, Steven E. Come, Karen Sepucha, Laura C. Collins, Ann H. Partridge, Shoshana M. Rosenberg. Breast cancer (BC) risk reduction in young women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Rethinking DCIS: An Opportunity for Prevention?; 2022 Sep 8-11; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Can Prev Res 2022;15(12 Suppl_1): Abstract nr PR009.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,467
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,354
Écart entre enseignants0,329 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCancer Prevention ResearchMême sujetBRCA gene mutations in cancerTravaux en français237 207