Long-term Prognostic Role of Functional Limitations Among Women With Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The long-term prognostic role of functional limitations among women with breast cancer is poorly understood. METHODS: We studied a cohort of 2202 women with breast cancer at two sites in the United States, who provided complete information on body functions involving endurance, strength, muscular range of motion, and small muscle dexterity following initial adjuvant treatment. Associations of baseline functional limitations with survival were evaluated in delayed entry Cox proportional hazards models, with adjustment for baseline sociodemographic factors, body mass index, smoking, physical activity, comorbidity, tumor characteristics, and treatment. Difference in covariates between women with and without limitations was assessed with Pearson χ(2) and Student t tests. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: During the median follow-up of 9 years, 112 deaths were attributable to competing causes (5% of the cohort) and 157 were attributable to breast cancer causes (7% of the cohort). At least one functional limitation was present in 39% of study participants. Proportionately, more breast cancer patients with functional limitations after initial adjuvant treatment were older, less educated, and obese (P < .001). In multivariable models, functional limitations were associated with a statistically significantly increased risk of death from all causes (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03 to 1.92) and from competing causes (HR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.69 to 3.98) but not from breast cancer (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.26). The relationship between functional limitations and overall survival differed by tumor stage (among women with stage I and stage III breast cancer, HR = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.23 to 3.32 and HR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.42 to 1.30, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this prospective cohort study, functional limitations following initial breast cancer treatment were associated with an important reduction in all-cause and competing-cause survival, irrespective of clinical, lifestyle, and sociodemographic factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".