The effect of surgery type on survival and recurrence in very young women with breast cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of surgical treatment on outcomes in breast cacner in very young women remains unclear. We sought to determine the effect of surgery type on risk of recurrence and survival in a population-based cohort. METHODS: All women diagnosed with breast cancer aged ≤35 (1994-2003) were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Patient, tumor, and treatment variables, including primary surgery, recurrences, and death were abstracted from chart review. Cox regression models were fit to determine the effect of surgery type on recurrence and overall survival. RESULTS: We identified 1,381 patients with 11-year median follow-up of which 793 (57%) had BCS. Of the remaining mastectomy patients, 52% had postmastectomy radiation. Overall, 41% of patients sustained a recurrence of any type and 31% died. Controlling for known confounders, there was no association between type of surgery and death from any cause (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.78, 1.25) or first recurrence (HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.75, 1.14). Distant recurrence was most common (13% in BCS; 25.3% in mastectomy) with local recurrence 12.4% after BCS and 7.5% after mastectomy. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of very young women who were selected for treatment with BCS and mastectomy, we found similar oncologic outcomes. J. Surg. Oncol. 2017;115:122-130. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 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".