Pregnancy after breast cancer: Are young patients willing to participate in clinical studies?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young patients with breast cancer (BC) are often concerned about treatment-induced infertility and express maternity desire. Conception after BC does not seem to affect outcome, but information in estrogen-receptor positive (ER+) disease is not definitive. From September 2012-March 2013, 212 evaluable patients with ER+ early BC, <37 years at diagnosis, from 5 regions (Europe/US/Canada/Middle-East/Australia) answered a survey about fertility concerns, maternity desire and interest in a study of endocrine therapy (ET) interruption to allow pregnancy. Overall, 37% of respondents were interested in the study; younger patients (≤30 years) reported higher interest (57%). Motivation in younger patients treated >30 months was higher (83%) than in older women (14%), interest was independent of age in patients treated for ≤30 months. A prospective study in this patient population seems relevant and feasible. The International-Breast-Cancer-Study-Group (IBCSG), within the Breast-International-Group (BIG) - North-American-Breast-Cancer-Groups (NABCG) collaboration, is launching a study (POSITIVE) addressing ET interruption to allow pregnancy.
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 | 0.008 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".