Women with Locally Advanced Breast Cancer are Not at Higher Risk for Contralateral Synchronous Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may provide a more accurate assessment of synchronous contralateral breast cancer in select cohorts of patients. The utility of this imaging technique for detecting synchronous contralateral breast cancers in patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) has not previously been described. We report our experience in assessing contralateral disease in a cohort of women with LABC who had clinical assessment, mammography, ultrasound, and MRI prior to neo-adjuvant therapy. Patients, who presented with LABC, stage IIB (T3N0), stage III A/B, were identified from a prospectively kept data base at a single tertiary care centre between November 2001 and August 2005. Charts were retrospectively reviewed and demographic, imaging and pathologic variables were abstracted. One hundred and one female patients with LABC were identified (median age 49). One hundred of 101 patients presented with a clinically obvious LABC. Three patients had LABC that was not visualized mammographically but was detected on ultrasound and MRI. Seventeen of 101 patients (17%) had contralateral imaging findings that required biopsy for diagnosis. Of the contralateral biopsies, 41% (7/17) were malignant. These malignant lesions were identified clinically in 4/7 patients, on 7/7 ultrasounds, 7/7 mammograms, and 5/5 MRI. Overall, 7% (7/101) patients had malignant synchronous contralateral disease. In our LABC patient cohort, 7% of patients presented with malignant contralateral disease. The incidence of contralateral disease in women with LABC is comparable with patients who present with early stage breast cancer. No single screening technique, ultrasound, mammogram or MRI, appeared to be superior for identifying contralateral synchronous malignancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".