Modeling the Effect of Tumor Size in Early Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Summary Background Data: The purpose of this study was to determine the type of relationship between tumor size and mortality in early breast carcinoma. Methods: The data was abstracted from 83,686 cases registered in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of women diagnosed with primary breast carcinoma between 1988 and 1997 presenting with a T1–T2 lesion and no metastasis in whom axillary node dissection was performed: 58,070 women were node-negative (N0) and 25,616 were node-positive (N+). End point was death from any cause. Tumor size was modeled as a continuous variable by proportional hazards using a generalized additive models procedure. Results: Functionally, a Gompertzian expression exp(-exp(-(size-15)/10)) provided a good fit to the effect of tumor size (in millimeters) on mortality, irrespective of nodal status. Quantitatively, for tumor size between 3 and 50 mm, the increase of crude cumulative death rate (number of observed deaths divided by the number of patients at risk) increased with size from 10% to 25% for N0 and from 20% to 40% for N+. Conclusions: The functional relationship of tumor size with mortality is concordant with current knowledge of tumor growth. However, its qualitative and quantitative independence of nodal status is in contradiction with the prevailing concept of sequential disease progression from primary tumor to regional nodes. This argues against the perception that nodal metastases are caused by the primary tumor. To determine the type of relationship between tumor size and mortality in early breast carcinoma, 83,686 cases of women diagnosed with a T1–2, N0–3, M0 primary and registered in the SEER Program were analyzed using a generalized additive models procedure. There is a functional relationship of tumor size with mortality, which is qualitatively and quantitatively independent from the nodal status.
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 | 0.000 | 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".