Use of Alternative Therapy in Postmenopausal Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Tamoxifen after Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to determine the frequency of alternative therapy use in postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer who were enrolled in a randomized clinical trial designed to determine the value of breast irradiation after treatment with breast-conserving surgery and tamoxifen. A questionnaire was given to 300 patients, ages 52 to 90 years, after completion of radiation therapy (if any). Of the 290 respondents, 78 (27%) had used some form of alternative therapy. Of these, 60.3% started after the diagnosis of breast cancer. Users of alternative therapies were significantly younger than nonusers (67.0 +/- 8.4 years versus 70.0 +/- 8.7 years, p = 0.009) and they used a median of one type of therapy per person (range 1-13). Users of alternative therapies were more likely to have experienced symptoms (stiffness, pain, numbness, or swelling) in the ipsilateral shoulder or arm after treatment of their breast cancers compared to nonusers (odds ratio [OR] = 2.0, p = 0.02). This relationship between alternative therapy use and symptoms was strongest in the group who started alternative therapies after breast cancer diagnosis (OR = 2.1, p = 0.05). On multivariate analysis, younger age and radiotherapy treatment were related to alternative therapy use. In conclusion, 27% of patients with early stage breast cancer used alternative therapy. Users were more likely to be younger and to experience shoulder or arm symptoms after breast-conserving surgery with radiation.
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".