MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1850402196 · doi:10.1002/cncr.28747

Breast cancer detection among young survivors of pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma with screening magnetic resonance imaging

2014· article· en· W1850402196 on OpenAlexafffund
Minh Thi Tieu, Candemır Çiğşar, Sameera Ahmed, Andrea K. Ng, Lisa Diller, Barbara‐Ann Millar, Pavel Crystal, David Hodgson

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersPediatric Oncology Group of OntarioCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerMammographyMagnetic resonance imagingBiopsyRadiologyBreast MRICancerStage (stratigraphy)Radiation therapyLymph nodeOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Female survivors of pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) who have received chest radiotherapy are at increased risk of breast cancer. Guidelines for early breast cancer screening among these survivors are based on little data regarding clinical outcomes. This study reports outcomes of breast cancer screening with MRI and mammography (MMG) after childhood HL. METHODS: We evaluated the results of breast MRI and MMG screening among 96 female survivors of childhood HL treated with chest radiotherapy. Outcomes measured included imaging sensitivity and specificity, breast cancer characteristics, and incidence of additional imaging and breast biopsy. RESULTS: Median age at first screening was 30 years, and the median number of MRI screening rounds was 3. Ten breast cancers were detected in 9 women at a median age of 39 years (range, 24-43 years). Half were invasive and half were preinvasive. The median size of invasive tumors was 8 mm (range, 3-15 mm), and none had lymph node involvement. Sensitivity and specificity of the screening modalities were as follows: for MRI alone, 80% and 93.5%, respectively; MMG alone, 70% and 95%, respectively; both modalities combined, 100% and 88.6%, respectively. All invasive tumors were detected by MRI. Additional investigations were required in 52 patients, (54%), and 26 patients (27%) required breast biopsy, with 10 patients requiring more than 1 biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Screening including breast MRI with MMG has high sensitivity and specificity in pediatric HL survivors, with breast cancers detected at an early stage, although it is associated with a substantial rate of additional investigations.

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)0.000
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 score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations58
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207