Prospective cohort study of lifetime physical activity and breast cancer survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few studies have examined the association between physical activity and disease outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Here, we report the association between lifetime total physical activity performed prior to diagnosis and disease outcomes in a population-based sample of breast cancer survivors. A cohort of 1,231 women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1995 and 1997 was followed for a minimum of 8.3 years for any cancer progressions, recurrences and new primaries; and a minimum of 10.3 years for deaths. All treatment and follow-up care received was abstracted from medical records. Data on physical activity including type (occupational, household, recreational) and dose (frequency, intensity and duration) performed during the entire lifetime until diagnosis were examined in Cox proportional hazards models as well as with cumulative incidence curves. An average of 126 MET-hr/week were reported for total physical activity (of which 13.9, 46.9 and 65.3 MET-hr/week were, respectively, for recreational, occupational and household activity). A decreased risk of breast cancer death and all deaths was observed among women in the highest versus the lowest quartiles of recreational activity (MET-hr/week/year) (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.36-0.79). Both moderate (0.56, 95% CI = 0.38-0.82) and vigorous intensity recreational activity (0.74, 95% CI = 0.56-0.98) decreased the risk of breast cancer death. Moderate intensity recreational activity decreased the risk of a recurrence, progression or new primary cancer (0.66, 95% CI = 0.48-0.91). No other association with breast cancer survival was observed for other types of physical activity. Prediagnosis recreational activity conferred a benefit for survival after breast cancer. Moderate intensity recreational activity was particularly protective.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".