Cognitive performance in breast cancer survivors: a ten-year follow-up
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Cognitive impairment (CI) has been widely reported as a frequent non-fatal cancer outcome. 15% to 25% of breast cancer (BCa) patients may have CI; however long-term variations of cognitive performance during and after the cessation of the treatments remains unclear. The present study aims to describe the evolution of cognitive performance in BCa survivors that are still in follow-up at breast cancer clinic, 10 years after diagnosis. Methods 506 women with BCa admitted to the Portuguese Institute of Oncology, Porto, in 2012, were evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) before any treatment, after one, three, five, and ten years. Patients with a MoCA score ≤1.5 standard deviation below the mean of age- and education-specific norms were considered to have probable cognitive impairment (PCI). The 10-year follow up started in October 2022, and is still in progress (as of March, 118 were evaluated). All women that are still being followed at IPO-Porto for consultations and treatments were evaluated with MoCA assessment. Results PCI prevalence at the 10 years was 43.0% (95%Confidence Interval: 34.1%-52.7%). Several pathways for cognitive performance were identified throughout the 10-year follow-up: 58 women (49.2%) never had PCI at baseline assessment or during follow-up; 19 women (16.1%) had PCI at baseline, from whom 5 (4.2%) had PCI in all evaluations, 2 (1.7%) did not have PCI in any follow up evaluation, 2 (1.7%) had PCI during follow up, but not at 10 years and 3 (2.5%) had PCI again only at the 10-year follow-up; 5 women (4.2%) did not have PCI at baseline but had PCI at least once during follow-up but not at 10 years, and 24.6% had PCI for the first time at 10 years. Conclusions The results show a high prevalence of PCI 10 years after diagnosis with a significant part being new cases. These results highlight the need for including regular assessments of cognitive performance as a part of the clinical follow-up of BCa survivors. Key messages • There is a high prevalence of cognitive deficits in breast cancer suvivors 10 years after diagnosis. • Including cognitive evaluations of breast cancer survivors during clinical follow up are recommended.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».