Structural Brain Differences in Breast Cancer Patients Compared to Matched Controls Prior to Chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the relationship between chemotherapy and cognitive impairment requires information on pre-treatment variability between cancer patients and well-matched controls. The purpose of this study was to investigate neuroanatomical differences between breast cancer (BC) patients and controls, prior to chemotherapy,controllingfor possible confounding variables. Twenty-three female early-stage BC patients underwent MRI scanning after surgery but before chemotherapy and were sex-, age- and education-matched to non-cancer controls. Whole brain and region of interest (ROI) group comparisons of grey (GM) and white matter (WM) were performed using voxel-based morphometry.Significant ROI structural differences between BC patients and controls were found depending on the type of analysis used and the covariates entered. This is one of the first imaging studies to focus on pre-chemotherapy neuroanatomical differences between BC patients and well-matched controls, considering demographic, psychological and biological factors in the analyses. Results highlight the importance of better understanding the whole patient prior to chemotherapy, stressing the importance of rigorous methodological procedures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".