MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2523304255

Abstract A44: The prevalence of prognostic and treatment features for breast cancer survival: Are they different for First Nations women compared to other women in Ontario, Canada?

2009· article· en· W2523304255 on OpenAlexaffabout
A Ritchie, Anna M. Chiarelli, Loraine D. Marrett, Maureen Trudeau, E. Diane Nishri

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreCancer Care OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerSocioeconomic statusCancer registryEthnic groupCancerDemographyCohortPopulationMammographyStage (stratigraphy)GynecologyGerontologyFamily medicineInternal medicineEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There is growing literature in the United States proposing that the distribution of some prognostic features for cancer may vary by ethnic/racial status. Among Canadian cancer registries, data on prognostic features, as well as treatment, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, are not routinely collected. To determine these characteristics, data from medical charts of the cancer patient is abstracted. Previous work in Ontario, Canada has demonstrated that survival after a breast cancer diagnosis is poorer among First Nations women compared to other Ontario women. The purpose of this study is to identify the distribution of prognostic features and treatment received among First Nations and non-First Nations women diagnosed with breast cancer from 1995 to 2004 in Ontario. Study Design: This study employed a case-case design using the cohort of First Nations people in Ontario to identify 297 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 1995 and 2004. Concurrently, a random sample of 694 non-First Nations women were selected through the population-based cancer registry at Cancer Care Ontario and matched 2 to 1 on five-year date of diagnosis, age at diagnosis (15–54 vs. 55+), and Integrated Cancer Program (ICP) first attended. Data on stage at diagnosis, treatment received, risk factors and co-morbid conditions was collected from medical charts at the provincial ICP. Analysis: Univariate analyses were calculated by First Nations status. Results: A similar proportion of First Nations women are screened with mammography; stage at diagnosis is later for First Nations women (71% are diagnosed at stage II or higher compared to 55% among other Ontario women); proportions of women receiving chemo/hormonal therapy are similar; proportion of women undergoing biopsies and surgeries are similar, however the distribution of each procedure is different (for instance, modified radical mastectomies are 14% higher among First Nations women); and proportion of women having radiotherapy are lower for First Nations women. Conclusions: It is important to identify the prognosis and treatment factors that influence breast cancer survival in First Nations women. These preliminary findings will be further explored and controlled for variables such as socioeconomic status and other tumor characteristics. Once better understood, actions can be taken to improve the prognosis and treatment of First Nations women with breast cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Epidemiology and Prevention BiomarkersSame topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningFrench-language works237,207