Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Women aged ≥65 are generally underrepresented in early breast cancer studies. Therefore, the optimal management of this group of women remains less certain. METHODS: A literature review of recently published trials, reviews, and practice guidelines outlining the surgical and adjuvant management of early breast cancer in older women was performed. RESULTS: Surgery remains as the cornerstone treatment for early breast cancer in the elderly. Adjuvant radiation is generally considered if the projected lifespan is >5 years. Hormone receptor-positive disease is best treated with adjuvant endocrine treatment; aromatase inhibitors and tamoxifen are both options. Evidence for the use of adjuvant chemotherapy and trastuzumab for high-risk disease in the elderly is more limited. Polychemotherapy is still preferred in fit older women. Certain toxicities from systemic treatments can be more pronounced and should be carefully managed. Treatment with systemic agents should be individualized, with consideration of patient preference, performance status, comorbidities, and projected lifespan. Molecular tumor signatures may help better select patients for treatment in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Age in itself should not be an absolute contraindication to any breast cancer therapy. Comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessment of elderly patients is imperative in evaluating eligibility for beneficial therapies.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".